An Overview of Play Therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Play is an essential parameter of children's growth and expression and this is the reason of why the use of play therapy is considered as fundamental means of preventing and dealing with problems and difficulties presented to children. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper is to review the parameters related to this issue, emphasizing the efficacy of this therapeutic approach to various problems of children. METHODS: A review of the recent literature on the issue, searching through Greek and international databases (Medline, Heal-link), in English and Greek language. RESULTS: The review shows that play therapy as a form of prevention and treatment is suitable mainly for preschool and school age children. It is addressed to children who are in a transition period of their lives (after a divorce, a loss), with difficulties in managing feelings, in socializing or children who have behavioral problems. It is also addressed to children who have been witnesses of domestic violence, who have suffered some form of abuse, children who are to undergo a major surgery or those who have speech disorders. Furthermore, it is suitable for children who have some kind of developmental disorder (autism or attention deficit / hyperactivity disorder). Its efficiency is demonstrated by numerous research papers reporting a significant decrease of negative emotions and behaviors by its use. CONCLUSION: Play therapy is an alternative proposal of intervention on important issues related to children. Its implementation and value is widely known and is constantly expanding. The only condition for its implementation is the correct theoretical training of the professionals and the proper diagnosis.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.005 |
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".