MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406462666 · doi:10.3390/disabilities5010006

Mobility Intensive Training (Mob-IT) Protocol for Children with Cerebral Palsy: Feasibility and Fidelity Results

2025· article· en· W4406462666 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueDisabilities · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCerebral Palsy AllianceCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsCerebral palsyFidelityPhysical medicine and rehabilitationProtocol (science)Training (meteorology)MedicinePsychologyPhysical therapyComputer scienceTelecommunicationsGeographyAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Mobility Intensive Training (Mob-IT) protocol is an innovative intervention focused on motor learning to improve the mobility of children with cerebral palsy (CP). The objective was to describe the feasibility and intervention fidelity of Mob-IT. A single-subject experimental study was conducted with four children with CP, a median age of 11 (7–13) years, and a Gross Motor Function Classification System I–III. The Mob-IT included 24 h of practice of mobility goals, delivered three times a week in 2 h sessions over four weeks. Feasibility was assessed using the Qualitative Feedback Questionnaire (QFQ), evaluating adherence, acceptability, adverse effects, the clarity of procedures, and intervention time. The Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) was used to assess participant and caregiver satisfaction. Fidelity was measured by the type of feedback provided (intrinsic vs. extrinsic), task challenge level, and intervention volume. Participants reported good acceptance, few adverse effects, and satisfaction with the outcomes. The intervention adhered to the proposed principles, with a focus on extrinsic feedback and tasks showing progression over time. Time was well spent, being 78% focused on activities and using mostly extrinsic-focused feedback. The Mob-IT protocol was considered feasible and faithful to its principles. As this is a feasibility study, the results indicate the need to expand the intervention to a larger, randomized study.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.834

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.288 · 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