Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), a prevalent neurobehavioural childhood disorder, demonstrate a persistent pattern of inattention and hyperactive and/or impulsive behavior that is more severe than their typically developing peers. The current literature has examined issues of clinical diagnosis and pharmacological management of ADHD. There is a need to better understand the associated functional limitations and participation restrictions in ADHD. Occupational therapists are uniquely suited to address this perspective. Objectives: Grounded in implementation science, the first part of this project aimed to examine the available literature describing occupational therapy (OT) assessment and treatment interventions with children/youth with attention disorders. The second part involved disseminating an online survey to examine the level and nature of involvement of Canadian OT practice with children with ADHD. The purpose of this synthesis was to identify the scope of OT practice, indicate potential research and practice gaps, and to discuss future implications with respect to OT for children with attention disorders. Methods: First, a scoping study framework was used to review the literature published 1985-2015. Included were studies of participants aged 3-18 years with attention difficulties and the involvement of an occupational therapist as researcher or practitioner. The International Classification of Functioning Disability and Health-Child/Youth (ICF-CY) served as a taxonomy to guide the thematic analysis. For the second part, a bilingual national survey was created based on scoping review findings and interviews with experts in pediatrics' and knowledge translation. The survey link was sent to pediatric OTs across Canada through mailing lists obtained from national and provincial orders. Results: For the scoping study, after removing duplicates, 118/420 papers met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 21% (n=25) were grey literature. Approximately half of the empirical papers (n=86) discussed impairments in children/youth with ADHD (43% [n=37]), often exploring co-existing difficulties (e.g. sensory processing and motor skills). A slightly smaller number of papers addressed outcomes describing childhood occupations or activities/participation restrictions (36%; [n=31]), fewer described environmental/contextual factors (21% [n=18]). Only 22% (19/86) examined the effects of an intervention. In the second part of the study, a total of 172 surveys were completed (response rate =10.1%). Approximately 59% of OT respondents working in pediatrics reported 26-75% of their caseload consisted of children with ADHD. Greater than 90% of respondents reported using OT interventions to improve fine motor functioning, sensory processing, and school functioning in their treatment of children with attentional disorders. The most common form of service delivery was individualized sessions, followed by consultation. Conclusions: The thematic analysis revealed OTs were implicated across all levels of functioning as per the ICF-CY: body structures/functions, activities, participation and at the environmental level. Results highlighted the lack of high quality evidence for OT interventions with children with attention disorders, particularly experimental research on interventions for functional outcomes. Survey results were reflective of scoping review results. OTs generally used sensory-based principles to address the symptoms of children with ADHD. Consultative service delivery models require further investigation with respect to working with this population. Potential gaps and implications at the research, practice and organizational levels are discussed to further support the role of OT with this population.
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 | 0.005 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".