Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Children with asymmetric cerebral palsy often have abnormal hand posture with excessive thumb adduction and wrist flexion from early infancy.Progressive disregard of the more-affected hand can develop.Recent clinical use of elastic tape to improve thumb and wrist posture whilst allowing flexibility of movement, has appeared beneficial but has not been formally evaluated.This study aimed to assess: (1) feasibility and acceptability of taping and (2) effect on hand posture and function.Method: 20 children age 9 month to 3 year with asymmetric cerebral palsy were randomised to either 2 or 4 weeks of taping.All were assessed with and without tape at baseline, 2 and 4 weeks using the Assisting Hand Assessment (AHA) or Mini-AHA according to age, the House Thumb Score and the Zancolli classification.Those in the 2-week group started treatment after the 2-week assessment.Parents kept a diary of tape use, and completed a questionnaire at week 4. Results: 20/21 families approached took part.14/20 children completed all assessments.There was no demographic difference between the treatment groups at baseline.All 16 parents who completed the questionnaire reported some benefit from taping.11/16 reported increased awareness of the affected hand during taping.13/16 found the tape easy to apply.Practical issues were reported with tape adherence.Only one child showed improvement in House thumb score with tape on.There was no improvement in Zancolli score.AHA scores did not differ with tape on or off, or between baseline and follow up for either treatment group.Conclusion: Taping is a feasible and acceptable approach, and we have no concerns regarding recruiting to time and target.The quantitative outcome measures did not detect change in this population, despite positive parental reports.In any future evaluation, alternative outcome measures are required.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.775 | 0.526 |
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".