Long-Term Effi cacy of a Home-Based Intervention for Toddlers with Developmental Delays
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Developmental delays in toddlers require early and consistent intervention. A ten weeks home-based intervention program was designed to improve adaptive functioning in children with developmental delays. Purpose: The purpose is to compare children diagnosed with delayed milestones who have undergone intervention training with those who have not received it. Materials and Methods: Fourteen children with developmental delays, aged 1-4 years were randomly selected and assigned to either a control group or a home-based intervention group of seven children each. The control group received standard physiotherapy, while the intervention group had core stability training with strength and motor skill development. Both groups were evaluated preand post-treatment using Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development (BSID), Peabody Developmental Motor Scales– Second Edition (PDMS-2), and Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS). Results: We observed a statistically signifi cant improvement in strength and motor skills among children who underwent the 10- week intervention compared to those in the control group receiving regular physiotherapy. Conclusion: The home based intervention program demonstrated improved effi cacy in enhancing motor skills in children. Caregivers played a pivotal role in sustaining these gains.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".