Combining Unimanual and Bimanual Therapies for Children with Hemiparesis: Is There an Optimal Delivery Schedule?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Constraint-induced movement therapy (CIMT) and bimanual therapy (BT) are among the most effective hand therapies for children with unilateral cerebral palsy (uCP). Since they train different aspects of hand use, they likely have synergistic effects. The aim of this study was to examine the efficacy of different combinations of mCIMT and BT in an intensive occupational therapy program for children with uCP. Children (n = 35) participated in intensive modified CIMT (mCIMT) and BT, 6 weeks, 5 days/week, 6 h/day. During the first 2 weeks, children wore a mitt over the less-affected hand and engaged in functional and play activities with the affected hand. Starting in week 3, bimanual play and functional activities were added progressively, 1 hour/week. This intervention was compared to two different schedules of block interventions: (1) 3 weeks of mCIMT followed by 3 weeks of BT, and (2) 3 weeks of BT followed by 3 weeks of mCIMT. Hand function was tested before, after, and two months after therapy with the Assisting Hand Assessment (AHA), Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory (PEDI), and Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM). All three groups of children improved in functional independence (PEDI; p < 0.031), goal performance (COPM Performance; p < 0.0001) and satisfaction (COPM Satisfaction; p < 0.0001), which persisted two months post-intervention. All groups showed similar amounts of improvement, indicating that the delivery schedule for mCIMT and BT does not significantly impact the outcomes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".