MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Impact of Gamified Therapy on Physical, Cognitive, & Emotional Outcomes in Children with Cerebral Palsy: A Case Study Analysis

2024· article· en· W4405279619 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Robin Tommy, M.K. Badrinarayanan, Reshmi Ravindranathan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Intellectual Disability - Diagnosis and Treatment · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCerebral palsyIntervention (counseling)CognitionPsychologyMotor skillClinical psychologyBalance (ability)Play therapyDevelopmental psychologyPhysical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Cerebral palsy (CP) is a neurological disorder affecting motor, cognitive, and social development in children. Traditional therapies often struggle with engagement and adherence. This study evaluates a novel gamified treatment developed with the SHIFT Framework to improve outcomes in children with CP. Methods: A case study design assessed the effects of gamified therapy on seven children with various types and severities of CP. The intervention used the SHIFT Framework to include engaging game elements and customizable features. Assessments before and after the intervention measured hand-eye coordination, balance, motor skills, cognitive engagement, motivation, and emotional well-being using appropriate statistical methods. Results: Post-intervention, all cases showed improved motor skills, coordination, balance, cognitive engagement, and emotional states. Increased levels of attention, motivation, and persistence were noted, alongside enhanced therapy engagement. Statistical analysis revealed significant improvements (p<0.05) in most parameters. Conclusion: The gamified therapy approach using the SHIFT Framework effectively enhanced physical, cognitive, and emotional outcomes for children with CP. The engaging, personalized intervention improved motivation, adherence, and functional outcomes, particularly in cognitive aspects relevant to intellectual disabilities associated with CP. Further studies with larger cohorts and extended follow-ups are necessary to confirm these results and expand on the therapy’s applicability in CP management.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.319 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Intellectual Disability - Diagnosis and TreatmentSame topicCerebral Palsy and Movement DisordersFrench-language works237,207