Riding toward the future: inclusion and well-being for children, adolescents, and young adults with major disabilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The main objective of this study is to evaluate the effects of a weekly wheelchair-accessible passive cycling activity, which is routinely conducted at the school attended by non-ambulatory children, adolescents, and young adults with disabilities aged 5 to 22, over a period of 10 weeks. Not only functional and physical variables will be analyzed, but also participation variables. The specific objectives are as follows: • To analyze changes in trunk motor control and other functional indicators in non-ambulatory children, adolescents, and young adults with disabilities after 10 weeks of participation in a weekly wheelchair-accessible passive cycling activity. • To evaluate the effects of the intervention on participation variables, including the level of engagement in school and recreational activities, through measures such as the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM), the Goal Attainment Scale (GAS), and specific questionnaires designed to collect the perceptions of teachers, physiotherapists, and legal representatives. • To determine the impact of the activity on physical variables such as physical activity levels, number and duration of seizures, sleep quality, heart rate variability and body composition, as well as pain perception throughout the intervention period. Study Design The study follows a quasi-experimental design. This quasi-experimental study will be conducted over a period of 23 weeks following sample recruitment and will be structured in five phases. Initially, a baseline measurement phase (T1) will be conducted to assess the participants' initial status. This will be followed by a control phase (T1-T2), during which participants will not participate in the adapted bicycle intervention. A second measurement phase (T2) will then be conducted to record variables after the control period. The intervention will begin in the next phase, the intervention phase (T2-T3), in which participants will participate in at least one weekly wheelchair-adapted bicycle activity lasting 30 minutes at a speed of 10-12 km/h, supervised by their school physical therapist, who actively performs the pedaling. Finally, a final measurement phase (T3) will be conducted to evaluate the effects of the intervention. Intervention Plan - T1 (30 minutes): Participant assessment + questionnaires to be completed by parents/guardians, classroom professionals (teachers and TAs), and physical therapists. - T1 (1 week): Sleep quality measurement with a digital clock. - T1-T2 (10 weeks): Control period: Weekly sleep quality questionnaire (parents/guardians); Daily quality of life questionnaire (classroom professionals). - T2 (30 minutes): Pre-intervention participant assessment + questionnaires to be completed by parents/guardians, classroom professionals (teachers and TAs), and physical therapists. - T2 (1 week): Sleep quality measurement with a digital clock. - T2-T3 (10 weeks): Intervention period: Adaptive cycling activity with the participant's physical therapist, two 30-minute sessions per week. Weekly sleep quality questionnaire (parents/guardians); daily quality of life questionnaire (classroom professionals). - T2 (30 minutes): Post-intervention assessment of participants + questionnaires to be completed by parents/guardians, classroom professionals (teachers and TAs), and physical therapists. - T2 (1 week): Sleep quality measurement with a digital watch. Children, adolescents, or young adults between the ages of 5 and 22. Classification as GMFCS levels IV or V. Regular school attendance. Regular participation in school physical therapy sessions. Informed consent signed by the participants' legal guardians. Exclusion Criteria Recent surgeries within the last three months prior to the start of the study. Medical conditions that contraindicate adapted physical activity with a bicycle, according to a medical assessment or the school's physical therapist. Planned prolonged absence during the study period that prevents completion of the control and intervention phases. Refusal or lack of cooperation by the participant during adapted bicycle sessions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".