Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigates the impact of individualized sensory diets on children’s occupational performance in daily life. Sensory diets are structured, child-specific interventions designed to facilitate improved sensory processing by integrating activities into established routines. They involve a tailored home program plan, consistent application, and interventions aligned with the child’s specific sensory needs (Wilbarger, 1995).Using a multiple single-case study design, this research examined the outcomes of sensory diets prescribed alongside direct occupational therapy (OT) services for four white male children aged 3 years, 11 months to 5 years, and 8 months with neurodevelopmental disorders. Participants were recruited through Developmental FX (DFX) in Denver, CO, and their progress was assessed from January to October 2024 using the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM). COPM performance ratings, measured at three-time points (T0, T1, T2), tracked changes in body awareness, emotional regulation, fine motor skills, and social engagement. Results indicated improvements in some areas, particularly in fine motor skills and self-care routines, for participants with higher compliance (75-100%), while those with low compliance (0-25%) demonstrated limited progress. Key factors influencing outcomes included alignment between the sensory diet activities and therapeutic goals, compliance, and the duration of intervention. These findings highlight sensory diets as a valuable intervention for addressing sensory processing challenges and enhancing occupational performance in children. This study contributes to the growing evidence supporting sensory diets as a key component of pediatric OT, fostering collaboration between therapists and families to promote meaningful improvements in children’s daily lives.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".