Interventions to Promote Bimanual Activities and Participation in Daily Life Activities in Children with Cerebral Palsy: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aims To identify rehabilitation interventions and outcome measures that target bimanual activities and autonomy in activities of daily living (ADLs) in children with cerebral palsy.Methods This scoping review followed the Arksey and O’Malley framework. The literature search was conducted in five medical databases. Inclusion criteria were studies of children with cerebral palsy that delivered rehabilitation interventions targeting upper limb function and used valid outcome measures assessing bimanual activities or ADLs. The exclusion criteria were pharmacological or surgical interventions, reviews, expert opinions, protocols and qualitative studies. Two independent researchers screened titles/abstracts and full texts. Data related to the study participants, interventions, outcome measures and results were extracted.Results Eighty-nine publications were included in this review. Out of the 17 interventions identified, the most frequent were constraint-induced movement therapy (n = 29), virtual reality (n = 22), hand-arm bimanual intensive training (n = 12), bimanual intensive training (n = 11) and action observation (n = 6). All five interventions showed significant improvements on bimanual function, whereas all but action observation showed improvements in autonomy in ADLs. We identified 15 outcome measures capturing bimanual activities and 6 capturing autonomy in ADLs.Conclusion This scoping review provides essential information for the improvement of rehabilitation interventions for children with cerebral palsy.
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 | 0.006 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".