Protocol for a randomized controlled trial to evaluate a year-long (NICU-to-home) evidence-based, high dose physical therapy intervention in infants at risk of neuromotor delay
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Developmental disabilities and neuromotor delay adversely affect long-term neuromuscular function and quality of life. Current evidence suggests that early therapeutic intervention reduces the severity of motor delay by harnessing neuroplastic potential during infancy. To date, most early therapeutic intervention trials are of limited duration and do not begin soon after birth and thus do not take full advantage of early neuroplasticity. The Corbett Ryan-Northwestern-Shirley Ryan AbilityLab-Lurie Children's Infant Early Detection, Intervention and Prevention Project (Project Corbett Ryan) is a multi-site longitudinal randomized controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of an evidence-based physical therapy intervention initiated in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) and continuing to 12 months of age (corrected when applicable). The study integrates five key principles: active learning, environmental enrichment, caregiver engagement, a strengths-based approach, and high dosage (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT05568264). METHODS: We will recruit 192 infants at risk for neuromotor delay who were admitted to the NICU. Infants will be randomized to either a standard-of-care group or an intervention group; infants in both groups will have access to standard-of-care services. The intervention is initiated in the NICU and continues in the infant's home until 12 months of age. Participants will receive twice-weekly physical therapy sessions and caregiver-guided daily activities, assigned by the therapist, targeting collaboratively identified goals. We will use various standardized clinical assessments (General Movement Assessment; Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, 4th Edition (Bayley-4); Test of Infant Motor Performance; Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory Family Impact Module; Alberta Infant Motor Scale; Neurological, Sensory, Motor, Developmental Assessment; Hammersmith Infant Neurological Examination) as well as novel technology-based tools (wearable sensors, video-based pose estimation) to evaluate neuromotor status and development throughout the course of the study. The primary outcome is the Bayley-4 motor score at 12 months; we will compare scores in infants receiving the intervention vs. standard-of-care therapy.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".