The Canadian 24-Hour Movement Guidelines for Preschoolers With Disabilities: Occupational Therapists’ Perspectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. This study explores occupational therapists’ (OTs) perceptions of using the Canadian 24-Hour Movement Guidelines for the Early Years in their practice with preschool-aged clients (aged 3–4 years) with developmental disabilities. Methods. This study captured perspectives of the guidelines from OTs working in Canada via in-depth, virtual interviews ( n = 11). Applied, deductive thematic analysis situated in the knowledge, attitudes, behavior framework, which provides a structured approach to understanding and addressing healthcare practitioners’ perspectives on implementing guidelines in practice, was conducted. Findings. Eight themes were identified: awareness and familiarity; agreement; outcome expectancy; self-efficacy; motivation; external—clients; external—guideline use; and external—environment. The results illustrate that while OTs may be motivated to incorporate the guidelines, concerns regarding their rigidity and applicability to diverse client needs hinder application in practice. Conclusion. The study highlights the need for additional resources and training to enhance OTs’ ability to adapt and apply the guidelines effectively, ensuring they meet the individual needs of children with developmental disabilities. This research underscores the potential for OTs to play a crucial role in promoting healthful movement behaviors in early childhood through the tailored application of the guidelines.
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".