MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3019024509 · doi:10.1111/1440-1630.12666

What is the threshold dose of upper limb training for children with cerebral palsy to improve function? A systematic review

2020· review· en· W3019024509 on OpenAlex
Michelle Jackman, Natasha A. Lannin, Claire Galea, Leanne Sakzewski, Laura Miller, Iona Novak

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Occupational Therapy Journal · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCerebral palsyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicinePhysical therapyRehabilitationUpper limbPsychological interventionMinimal clinically important differenceIntervention (counseling)PopulationGross Motor Function Classification SystemReceiver operating characteristicOccupational therapyRandomized controlled trialSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Neuroplasticity is harnessed through high-intensity or high-dose training. Given the costs and time burden for families of children with cerebral palsy (CP), it is important to quantify which rehabilitation training approaches and doses confer the largest clinical gain. The main objective of this systematic review was to determine any threshold dose of upper limb training needed for children with CP to achieve clinically significant functional improvements. METHODS: This systematic review included studies if they were as follows: randomised controlled trials; participants had a diagnosis of CP or brain injury; mean age of participants was 0-18 years; and intervention was an active upper limb training intervention. Two raters independently extracted data. Data were pooled and analysed using a receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve and odds ratios to investigate the dose of practice that led to clinically significant gains. RESULTS: A total of 74 trials were included in this review. Quantitative analyses included 25 studies (707 participants; age range 18 months to 21 years) for motor function (Assisting Hand Assessment) and 20 studies (491 participants; age range 3 months to 17 years) for individual goal achievement (Canadian Occupational Performance Measure). ROC curve analyses found that approximately 40 hr of practice is needed to improve upper limb motor ability in the unilateral population. For all typographies of CP, individual goals were achieved at a lower dose (14-25 hr) of practice when goal-directed interventions were provided. CONCLUSION: To improve individual goals, children need to practice goals for more than 14-25 hr, combining face-to-face therapy with home practice. To improve general upper limb function (based on evidence in the unilateral population), children need to practice for more than 30-40 hr. Interventions that set functional goals and involve actual practice of those goals lead to goal achievement at a lower dose than general upper limb motor training.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.387
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.104
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it