Improving body functions through participation in community activities among young people with physical disabilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To examine the impact of engagement in a self-chosen community-based activity on three relevant body functions (motor, cognitive, and affective) as well as on the performance of the selected activity. METHOD: An individual-based interrupted time series design with multiple baselines was used. Seven young people (four males, three females) aged 15 to 25 years (median 18y; interquartile range 17-20y) with physical disabilities participated in an 8-week community activity of choice (e.g. swimming, playing piano). Change in three relevant body functions, underpinning the specific chosen activity, including motor (e.g. Functional Reach Test, Trunk Impairment Scale, dynamometers), cognitive and affective (Behavior Assessment System for Children), as well as activity performance (Canadian Occupational Performance Measure) were measured repeatedly, providing individual outcome trajectories. Linear and mixed-effects models were used. RESULTS: Significant improvements in at least one aspect of motor function (6 out of 6), cognition (3 out of 3), affect (5 out of 7), and performance (7 out of 7) were observed. Specifically, the intervention had a moderate to large effect on hyperactivity (1.45, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.0-1.9) with a smaller effect on anxiety (0.21, 95% CI 0.10-0.32) and inadequacy (0.21, 95% CI 0.02-0.39). Concurrently, a notable effect size for activity performance (4.61, 95% CI 0.76-8.46) was observed. Average change across motor outcomes was substantial (3.7 SDs from baseline), yet non-significant. INTERPERTATION: Findings provide initial evidence of the benefits resulting from participation-based interventions, emphasizing the merit of meaningful 'real-life' young people-engaging therapy. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: Participation-based interventions can impact body-function level outcomes. Significant improvements in the performance of chosen activities were observed. Significant improvements were also seen in cognitive and affective body functions. Improvements in motor-related outcomes were substantial but not statistically significant.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".