MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414297764 · doi:10.1080/17518423.2025.2541830

Children and Teens in Charge of Their Health (CATCH): A Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial of Solution-Focused Coaching to Foster Healthy Lifestyles in Children with Spina Bifida or Cerebral Palsy

2025· article· en· W4414297764 on OpenAlexafffund
Lina María Peñuela Calderón, Gillian King, Annie Labbé, Toni Lui, Désirée B. Maltais, Chantal Mérette, Hélène Moffet, Amy C. McPherson

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Neurorehabilitation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in RehabilitationCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Saguenay–Lac-Saint-JeanToronto Rehabilitation InstituteCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-MontréalUniversity of TorontoHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsSpina bifidaCerebral palsyCoachingRandomized controlled trialFidelityIntervention (counseling)Psychological interventionHealth coaching

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This feasibility randomized controlled trial (RCT) evaluated “Children and Teens in Charge of Their Health” (CATCH), a solution-focused coaching intervention promoting physical activity and healthy eating in children with spina bifida or cerebral palsy. All participants received standard care and printed materials; the intervention group also received up to eight coaching sessions over six months. Quantitative analyses examined whether a priori feasibility criteria were met and the responsiveness of measures assessing goal attainment, functional mobility, dietary intake and physical activity at four timepoints over 12 months. Nineteen participants were randomized. While stratification and fidelity criteria were met, recruitment and retention were not, likely impacted by Covid-19. CATCH participants showed significant improvements in two of three goal attainment scores, along with positive trends in functional mobility, active hours, and some dietary measures compared to controls. Most outcome measures were responsive, although protocol adaptations are needed for a full-scale RCT.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 designRandomized trial
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmental NeurorehabilitationSame topicFamily and Disability Support ResearchFrench-language works237,207