MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411221930 · doi:10.1111/1440-1630.70033

Comparison of CO‐OP and goal‐directed training on occupational performance and functional status in children with cerebral palsy: Three‐armed randomised trial

2025· article· en· W4411221930 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Zeynep Kolit, Rüya Gül Temel, Gamze Ekici

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Occupational Therapy Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCerebral palsyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationOccupational therapyPhysical therapyMedicinePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Cerebral palsy (CP) is a neurological disorder that impacts motor skills and daily functioning in children. While conventional occupational therapy aims to improve these areas, newer approaches like 'Cognitive Orientation to Daily Occupational Performance' (CO-OP) and 'Goal-Directed Training' (GDT) show promise. However, their comparative effectiveness in enhancing occupational performance and functional status in children with CP remains underexplored. This study aimed to investigate and compare the effects of the CO-OP and GDT on the occupational performance and functional status of children with CP. METHODS: Sixty children were randomly assigned to three intervention groups: CO-OP approach in addition to conventional occupational therapy (COT) (Group A; n = 20), GDT in addition to COT (Group B, n = 20), and only COT (Group C; n = 20). The outcomes regarding occupational performance via the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure and functional status via the Paediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory were evaluated by the blind evaluators before and after the interventions. All participants received two sessions per week over a 12-week period. CONSUMER AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT: No consumer and community involvement in these studies. RESULTS: All groups demonstrated statistically significant improvements in occupational performance and functional status (p < 0.001). Between-group comparisons revealed that Group A achieved greater improvements in occupational performance and functional status, which particularly in the areas of self-care, mobility, and total Paediatric Assessment of Disability Inventory (PEDI) scores (p < 0.05), compared to the other groups. CONCLUSIONS: Although significant gains were achieved on occupational performance and functional status levels of both the CO-OP approach and GDT, it was revealed that the group receiving the CO-OP approach had superior effects. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Cerebral palsy (CP) is a condition that affects how children move and use their muscles. It can make everyday tasks like getting dressed or playing more difficult. Occupational therapy helps children with CP build their skills and become more independent in daily life. This study looked at two types of therapy: cognitive orientation to daily occupational performance (CO-OP) and goal-directed training (GDT). The aim was to find out which approach worked better for improving everyday activities and skills in children with CP. The results showed that the children who took part in the CO-OP program made the most progress. They improved more in both daily tasks and skills compared to the children who received GDT. Both groups showed some improvement, but CO-OP had stronger results. These findings suggest that CO-OP could be a helpful part of therapy programs for children with CP. It may support them in doing more things on their own. More research with larger groups of children is needed to learn more about how these therapies work in the long term.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.728

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian Occupational Therapy JournalSame topicCerebral Palsy and Movement DisordersFrench-language works237,207