Exploring young children’s activity and participation change following 6 months’ power mobility experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction This pre-post study explored the effect of children’s 6 months’ experience in one of four early power mobility devices. Method Satisfaction with parent-selected goal achievement was measured using the wheelchair outcome measure for young people and compared with the assessment of learning powered mobility use, as well as device expectation fulfilment ratings. Results Forty-six children with mobility limitations, aged 13–68 months (mean 40.40; SD 15.60) participated. The most common condition was cerebral palsy ( n = 33; 71.74%). The Wilcoxon signed rank test measured the positive change in goal achievement ( z = 4.90; P<0.001; r = 0.51). Fair to good statistically significant Spearman’s correlations were observed between power mobility skill and goal achievement, as well as parent and therapist device expectation scores ( r s = 0.48, 0.46 and 0.66, respectively; P<0.001). Parent and therapist ratings did not differ significantly. No statistically significant associations were found between goal achievement and child (age, diagnosis, abilities) or environmental factors (device, access method, loan length). Conclusion Children at all phases of power mobility skill, using various devices and access methods, can demonstrate activity and participation change following power mobility experience. This study adds validity evidence supporting the use of the wheelchair outcome measure for young people with young children by parent-proxy rating.
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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".