Wheelchair skills training improves power mobility and participation in young people with cerebral palsy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To explore the effect of a 4-week structured power wheelchair skills training programme (WSTP) intervention on mobility skills and participation in children and young people (CYP) with cerebral palsy (CP). METHOD: This was a one-group, repeated-measures study; baseline, intervention, and retention phases, each lasting 4 weeks, were used. Twelve participants (three females, nine males) with a mean age of 15 years 11 months (SD = 3 years 6 months) classified in Gross Motor Function Classification System levels IV and V participated in the study. To be included in the study, individuals had to be aged 6 to 21 years and currently using a power wheelchair. Participants received 12 WSTP training sessions of 45 minutes, 3 times per week. Power mobility skills were assessed using the Wheelchair Skills Test (WST) before baseline, before the intervention, after the intervention, and at the follow-up; mobility-related participation was assessed with the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM). Generalized mixed models with Bonferroni correction were used to assess the differences between the assessment points (p < 0.05). RESULTS: Statistical analysis showed a 10.4% (12.5) increase in WST total scores (p < 0.001) after the intervention compared to before the intervention, and a 1-point (0.9) increase in the COPM performance subdomain (p = 0.002). INTERPRETATION: Power mobility skills and mobility-related participation improved after a 4-week WSTP intervention in CYP with CP. Thus, task-based power mobility skills training based on the WSTP, and in line with individualized needs and capabilities, taking place in a natural environment, should be recommended. Power mobility skills training needs to be structured and individualized; the training interventions must consider the individual, the task, and the environment.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".