Effects of Goal-Oriented Functional Tasks on Gross Motor Function and Activities of Daily Living in Children with Cerebral Palsy -A Single Case Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: The study sought to determine whether goal achievement, performance, satisfaction, activities of daily living, and gross motor function in children with spastic cerebral palsy are positive affected by goal-oriented functional task training. Methods: In a single case study, two 7-year-old girls diagnosed with spastic cerebral palsy were given functional task training based on individualized goals for 24 60-minute sessions over a period of 6 months. The individualized goals reflected the needs of both children and parents. The Canadian occupational performance measure (COPM) and the goal attainment scale (GAS) were used to measure goal performance and satisfaction before and after intervention. Independence of activities of daily living before and after intervention were assessed using the functional independence measure for children (Wee-FIM). And change of gross motor function were assessed using gross motor function measure (GMFM). Results: Clinically significant changes were observed in COPM and GAS, as well as positive changes in independence of gross motor function and activities of daily living. Conclusion: The findings indicate that goal-oriented functional task training addresses the needs of children with spastic cerebral palsy, which increases treatment satisfaction and has a positive effect on independent activities and participation in daily life.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".