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 OpenAlexaboutno aff
Isabella Pessóta Sudati, Ana Paula Zanardi da Silva, Natália Duarte Pereira, Nelci Adriana Cicuto Ferreira Rocha, Ana Carolina de Campos

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.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.092

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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

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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDisabilitiesSame topicCerebral Palsy and Movement DisordersFrench-language works237,207