MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285800100 · doi:10.2196/39398

Effects of a Whole-body General Movement Intervention on Functional Muscle Strength of Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder: Results From a Comparison of Face-to-face Versus Telehealth-Based Intervention Delivery

2022· article· en· W4285800100 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sudha Srinivasan, Mackenzie Stahl, Nidhi Amonkar, Aparna Areytha, Catherine E. Myers, Wan-Chun Su, Corina Cleffi, Anjana Bhat

Bibliographic record

VenueIproceedings · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysical therapyRandomized controlled trialTelehealthMedicineAutism spectrum disorderIntervention (counseling)AutismPsychological interventionPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyTelemedicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) demonstrate impairments in postural strength and control, both of which are important for activities of daily living. With the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, more focus has been placed on telehealth interventions. Objective Our randomized controlled trial assessed the effects of a general movement (GM) intervention compared to a standard-of-care seated play (SP) intervention delivered via face-to-face (F2F) and telehealth (TH)-based modes of intervention delivery in children with ASD. Methods Thirty 5- to 14-year-old children were matched at baseline and randomly assigned to the GM or SP groups. Children participated in a 10-week study with pretests and posttests conducted during the first and last weeks and training in the intermediate 8 weeks (2 sessions/week at 1.5 hours/session). The strength subtest of the Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency (BOT-2) and a custom-developed functional strength test were administered at pretest and posttest. In addition, we assessed functional strength using 15 upper and lower body exercises that were administered during early and late training sessions. All strength tests were coded for errors in movement form and movement quality during execution. Results On the BOT-2, the GM group (pretest: mean 8.3, SE 1.1; posttest: mean 10.31, SE 1.3; P=.007) but not the SP group showed improvements in scaled scores on the strength subtest. There were no differences in the amount of change for children seen F2F versus TH in the GM group (F2F: mean 2.3, SE 0.8; TH: mean 1.8, SE 0.9; P=.70). In the GM group, 77% of participants showed improvement in front raises and 50% improved on both sumo squats and donkey kicks. Of the 15 upper and lower body functional strength exercises performed, 7 provided significant results at a significance level of P=.05. For the upper body, these included back row (early: mean 81.3, SE 4.6; late: mean 57.0, SE 7.8; P=.01), spread your wings (early: mean 55.5, SE 6.0; late: mean 32.1, SE 5.4; P=.008), press ups (early: mean 72.1, SE 5.3; late: mean 46.8, SE 8.0; P=.01), and superman reach (early: mean 74.4, SE 2.8; late: mean 58.9, SE 6.8; P=.009). For the lower body, these included donkey kicks (early: mean 69.2, SE 2.9; late: mean 40.2, SE 6.0; P<.001), do-a-dot (early: mean 77.4, SE 3.3; late: mean 56.3, SE 6.3; P=.008), and superman kick (early: mean 71.9, SE 2.9; late: mean 49.8, SE 6.8; P=.008). Across all 7 moves, a comparable or higher proportion of children seen via TH showed improvement in movement performance scores compared to children seen F2F. For 6 of 7 movements, the mean reduction in percent movement performance errors (early vs late) was greater for children seen via TH compared to children seen via F2F. In addition, for superman kick (sk), donkey kick (dk), press ups (pu), and superman reach (sr) exercises, a higher proportion of children seen via TH compared to F2F improved movement performance error scores with training (sk: 80% TH vs 50% F2F; dk: 90% TH vs 60% F2F; pu: 100% TH vs 50% F2F; sr: 90% TH vs 25% F2F). Conclusions Although preliminary, our data suggest that TH is an effective mode of delivery of gross motor interventions and can be used to promote functional upper and lower body muscle strength in children with ASD.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.452
Threshold uncertainty score0.863

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.249 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIproceedingsSame topicCerebral Palsy and Movement DisordersFrench-language works237,207