The Cognitive Orientation to daily Occupational Performance (CO-OP) Approach is superior to ordinary treatment for achievement of goals and transfer effects in children with cerebral palsy and spina bifida – a randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Children with cerebral palsy (CP) or spina bifida (SB) often have executive dysfunction affecting activity performance. With the Cognitive Orientation to daily Occupational Performance (CO-OP) Approach, children find their own way to perform activities, using problem-solving strategies and meta-cognitive thinking. The present study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of the CO-OP Approach in children with CP or SB, compared with conventional rehabilitation, in achieving self-identified activity goals, and to explore any generalization and transfer effects. METHOD: Randomized controlled trial, CO-OP versus treatment as usual, 38 children (7-16 years) participated. Each child identified four goals (to study generalization and transfer, one remained untrained). Primary outcomes: Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) and Performance Quality Rating Scale (PQRS). Secondary outcomes assessed executive functions and self-rated everyday-life competence. RESULTS: Self-rated goal attainment (COPM) was significantly greater for both trained and untrained goals in the CO-OP group compared with the control group. The rating of observed performance (PQRS) was significantly higher for trained goals in the CO-OP group. The CO-OP group experienced fewer problems in everyday life after treatment. Executive functions did not differ significantly between groups. CONCLUSION: CO-OP is more effective than ordinary treatment in achieving both trained and untrained goals.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONCO-OP enables children with CP (MACS levels I-III) or SB without intellectual disabilities to reach self-identified goals.CO-OP shows transfer effects to new activities and situations, which may enhance children's self-efficacy.CO-OP is an important complement to conventional rehabilitation services for children with CP and SB.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Randomized trial | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Randomized trial | high |
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".