Effectiveness of Cognitive Orientation to Occupational Performance intervention in improving motor skills of children with developmental coordination disorder: A randomized waitlist-control trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives To determine if Cognitive Orientation to Occupational Performance was effective in improving performance and transfer of motor learning in children with developmental coordination disorder (with/without attention deficit hyperactivity disorder); and whether outcomes were maintained three months post-intervention. Design Randomized waitlist-control trial (ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02597751) Setting BC Children's Hospital, Vancouver, Canada Subjects Thirty-seven children with developmental coordination disorder and 41 children with co-occurring attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (all 8–12 years), randomized to treatment or waitlist groups. Interventions One-hour of intervention once weekly for 10 weeks. Main Measures (1) Canadian Occupational Performance Measure to measure self-perceived performance of motor goals (10-point scale); (2) Performance Quality Rating Scale to measure therapist-observed movement quality (10-point scale); and (3) Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency – 2nd ed. to measure overall motor skill ability/transfer of motor learning (percentile). Results Both groups showed significant improvement ( p < 0.001) in motor performance (developmental coordination disorder: pre: 2.7 ± 2.2, post: 7.0 ± 1.0; developmental coordination disorder with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: pre: 2.3 ± 1.7, post: 7.0 ± 1.5) and movement quality (developmental coordination disorder: pre: 3.0 ± 1.5, post: 6.3 ± 1.7; developmental coordination disorder with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: pre: 3.0 ± 1.9, post: 5.7 ± 2.3). Three months after treatment, children maintained their gains, but only children with developmental coordination disorder showed transfer of learning to overall motor skills (pre:12 ± 15, post:12 ± 12, follow-up:14 ± 20, p < 0.001). Conclusion Intervention was similarly effective for children with developmental coordination disorder with/without attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in achieving and maintaining functional motor goals, but only children with developmental coordination disorder showed transfer of learning to other motor skills.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".