The Effectiveness of Integrated Gross Motor Skill Program on The Symptoms of Cerebal Palsy among Children
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
he primary aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of an integrated gross motor skills program intervention on improving motor functions compared to a control group, with evaluations conducted at three time points: pre-test, post-test, and follow-up. This study involved 40 participants, divided equally into experimental and control groups (N=20 for each group). Both groups were assessed for motor functions at three different times: before the intervention (pre-test), immediately after the intervention (post-test), and a follow-up phase. The experimental group received a specific intervention aimed at improving motor functions, whereas the control group did not receive this intervention. Statistical analyses included descriptive statistics, analysis of variance with repeated measurements, and Bonferroni post-hoc tests to evaluate the differences between and within the groups over time. The experimental group showed significant improvement in motor functions from pre-test to post-test (mean increase of 11.99, p=0.001) and maintained these improvements at follow-up (mean increase from pre-test of 12.40, p=0.001). The control group's scores remained stable across all time points, indicating no significant change. The analysis of variance confirmed significant effects for time, group, and the interaction between time and group, suggesting that the intervention was effective in enhancing motor functions. The study concluded that the experimental intervention significantly improved motor functions in the participants compared to the control group. These improvements were evident immediately after the intervention and were maintained at the follow-up, highlighting the long-term benefits of the intervention on motor function recovery.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it