Evidence-Based Practice: Physiotherapy for Children and Adolescents with Motor Symptoms of Conversion Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clinical Case: A boy aged 14 years with conversion disorder who presented with an ataxic gait pattern experienced complete symptom resolution after engaging in physiotherapy (PT) as part of interdisciplinary treatment. Clinical Question: Is there evidence to support the use of PT in children and adolescents with motor symptoms of conversion disorder? Evidence: All the extant paediatric literature consists of case studies and case series. Some exciting research has been published in the adult literature that suggests the potential positive benefits of PT. Limitation of the Evidence and Future Research: The paediatric literature is limited in quantity and quality. In the adult literature, most studies are limited in that they do not control for the type of motor symptoms and do not evaluate PT independent of interdisciplinary treatment. In future research, it would be pertinent to (1) evaluate PT independent of interdisciplinary treatment, (2) control for the type of motor symptoms, and (3) describe theoretical models. Recommendation for Clinical Question: Expert consensus and emerging evidence suggest that PT may be beneficial in adults with conversion disorder, but the evidence in the paediatric population is insufficient.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.019 | 0.200 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.012 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.006 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".