Occupational performance goals and outcomes of time-related interventions for children with ADHD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) have difficulties with occupational performance, related to difficulties with time-processing ability. AIMS: To examine the outcome of a multimodal time-related intervention designed to support children aged 9-15 years with ADHD, to achieve their occupational performance goals and improve satisfaction with occupational performance. A further aim was to compare the children's ratings of outcome with their parents' ratings and to analyse the occupational performance goals. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A pre-post design was used. Participants were 27 children, aged 9-15 years. Children and parents rated occupational performance and satisfaction at baseline and follow-up, after 24 weeks, using the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM). The intervention consisted of time-skills training and time-assistive devices (TADs). Descriptive and non-parametric statistics were used. RESULTS: Significant improvements were found in reported performance and satisfaction. Children's were higher than those of their parents. Most goals were about carrying out daily routines, knowing the duration of an activity and knowing what will happen in the near future. CONCLUSION AND SIGNIFICANCE: The study contributes to knowledge about suitable interventions for children with ADHD who have time-related difficulties. Occupational therapy interventions, including TADs and time-skills training, resulted in significantly improved occupational performance.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".