Research Paper: Intervention for Mentally Disabled Children

Pages: 15 (6396 words)  ·  Bibliography Sources: 30  ·  Level: Corporate/Professional  ·  Topic: Children  ·  Buy This Paper

SAMPLE EXCERPT:

[. . .] 7%) and fine motor skills (58.3%) but had mean fine motor skill levels that exceeded their mean gross motor skill levels (50%). Based on the results, EIPs for children with Down syndrome appear to provide a foundation for subsequent learning and development.

Because Down syndrome children lack muscle tone, a condition termed hypotonia physiotherapy is critical for these individuals in the form of early interventions. Without physiotherapy the Down syndrome child will be "left with weaknesses, odd behaviors, and disfigurements that need not have happened." (Hudson, 2010) Psychological assessments for Down Syndrome children are important for assessing cognitive abilities, adaptive skills and behavior. Functional skills include communication and motor skills as well as self-help skills and socialization skills. (Cicchette and Beeghly, 1990, paraphrased)

Results of the Study

Self-Help

Mean post-test Self-Help field values of total DS cases and groups 2&3, showed a non-significant statistical (P>0.01) increase compared with mean pretest Self-Help field values (P=0.4, 0.86, respectively). On the other hand, Mean post-test Self-Help field value of group 1 DS cases, showed a non-significant statistical (P>0.01) difference, compared with that of pretest Self-Help field (Table 13).

Pearson correlations among the mean pretest developmental fields values showed that Self-Help had a statistically highly significant positive correlation with Social (P=0.000), Motor (P=0.000) and Language (P=0.007) fields, and a statistically significant positive correlation with Cognitive (P=.021) field (Table 14).

Mean pretest Self-Help field values showed a statistically highly significant (P=0.000) positive correlation with those of post-test Cognitive field, and a statistically significant positive correlation with post-test Self-Help (P=.031) and Language (P=.042) fields. Meanwhile, there was a statistically non-significant (P>0.05) correlation between Self-Help field and both Social and Motor fields (Table 15).

Pearson correlations among the mean post-test developmental fields values of DS cases showed that Self-Help had a statistically highly significant (P=.001) positive correlation with Motor field, and a statistically significant (P=.040) positive correlation with Language. Otherwise, there was a statistically non-significant (P>0.05) correlation between post-test Self-Help and both post-test Social and Cognitive fields (Table 16).

Regarding the sex of DS cases, there was a statistically non-significant (P>0.01) increase of mean pretest Self-Help field value of female cases, compared with that of males (Tables 9). Meanwhile, there was a statistically non-significant (P>0.01) decrease of mean post-test Self-Help f2ield value of male cases, compared with that of females (Table 11).

According to social class, there was a statistically non-significant (P>0.01) decrease of mean pretest value Self-Help developmental field of high (n=7) class DS cases, compared with that of middle and low class cases. Meanwhile, there was a statistically non-significant (P>0.01) increase of mean pretest Self-Help value of low class cases, compared with that of middle class ones (Table 10). The post-test mean Self-Help field of high class (n=7) DS cases, showed a statistically non-significant (P>0.01) decrease, compared with that of middle class (n=9) and low class (n=4) cases. On the other hand, there was a statistically non-significant (P>0.01) decrease of post-test mean middle class Self-Help field value, compared with that of the low class (Table 12).

There was a statistically non-significant (P>0.05) correlation between the mean of ages, maternal and paternal ages of DS cases, compared with both pretest and post-test Self-Help developmental field values (Tables 17,18).

Cognition

Mean post-test Cognitive field value of total DS cases, showed a highly significant statistical (P=0.001) increase, compared with that of mean pretest Cognitive field. Meanwhile, mean post-test Cognitive field value of group 2 DS cases, showed a significant (P=0.009) statistical increase, compared with that of mean pretest Cognitive field. On the other hand, mean post-test Cognitive field values of groups 1&3 of DS cases, showed a non-significant statistical (P=0.27, 0.19, respectively) increase, compared with those of mean pretest Cognitive field (Table 13).

Pearson correlations between mean pretest Cognitive field values and those of the other pretest developmental fields, showed a statistically significant positive correlation with Social (P=.045) and self-help (P.021) fields, otherwise, there was a statistically non-significant (P>0.05) correlation with other pretest developmental fields (Table 14).

Mean pretest Cognitive field values had a statistically highly significant positive correlation with those of post-test Cognitive (P=.000) field, and a statistically significant negative correlation with mean post-test Social (P=.019) field value. Meanwhile, there otherwise, there was a statistically non-significant (P>0.05) correlation with other post-test developmental fields (Table 15).

Mean post-test Cognitive field value showed a statistically non-significant (P>0.05) positive correlation with those of the other post-test developmental fields (Table 16).

Regarding the sex of the studied DS cases, there was a statistically non-significant (P>0.01) increase of mean pretest Cognitive field values of female cases, compared with that of males (Tables 9). On the other hand, there was a statistically non-significant (P>0.01) decrease of mean post-test Cognitive field values of female cases, compared with that of males (Table 11).

According to social class, there was a statistically non-significant (P>0.01) decrease of mean pretest Cognitive developmental field of high (n=7) class DS cases, compared with that of middle and low class cases. Meanwhile, there was a statistically non-significant (P>0.01) difference between the mean of pretest Cognitive value of low class cases, compared with that of middle class ones (Table 10). There was a statistically non-significant (P>0.01) increase of post-test mean high class Cognitive field value, compared with those of middle and low classes. On the other hand, there was a statistically non-significant (P>0.01) difference between the post-test mean of Cognitive value of middle class cases, compared with that of low class (Table 12).

There was a statistically non-significant (P>0.05) correlation between the mean of ages, maternal and paternal ages of DS cases, compared with both pretest and post-test Cognitive developmental field values (Tables 17,18).

Motor

Mean post-test Motor field value of total DS cases, showed a significant statistical (P<.01) increase, compared with that of mean pretest Cognitive field. Meanwhile, there was a statistically non-significant increase of mean post-test Motor field values of groups 1,2&3 of DS cases (P=0.56, 0.09, 0.43, respectively), compared with those of pretest Cognitive field (Table 13).

Pearson correlations between mean pretest Motor developmental field values and those of the other pretest developmental fields, showed a statistically highly significant positive correlation with Social (P=.002), Self-Help (P=.000), and Language (P=.005) fields. On the other hand, there was a statistically non-significant (P>0.05) correlation with Cognition (Table 14).

Mean pretest Motor developmental field values showed a statistically highly significant positive correlation with post-test Motor (P=.004) field. Meanwhile, pretest Motor developmental field values had a statistically significant positive correlation with post-test Self-Help (P=.033) and Cognitive (P=.012) fields, and a statistically non-significant negative correlation with Social field (Table 15).

Pearson correlations among the mean post-test developmental fields values of DS cases showed that mean post-test Motor field value had a highly significant (P=0.001) correlation with Self-Help field. Otherwise, there was a statistically non-significant (P>0.05) correlation between Motor field and Social, Cognition and Language developmental fields (Table 16).

Regarding the sex of the studied DS cases, there was a statistically non-significant (P>0.01) decrease of mean pretest and post-test Motor field values of female cases, compared with those of males (Tables 9,11).

According to social class, there was a statistically non-significant (P>0.01) decrease of mean pretest Motor developmental field of high (n=7) class DS cases, compared with those of middle and low class cases. Meanwhile, there was a statistically non-significant (P>0.01) increase of mean pretest Motor value of low class cases, compared with that of middle class ones (Table 10). There was a statistically non-significant (P>0.01) decrease of mean post-test high class Motor field value, compared with those of middle and low classes. On the other hand, there was a statistically non-significant (P>0.01) increase of the mean post-test Motor field value of middle class cases, compared with that of low class ones (Table 12).

There was a statistically non-significant (P>0.05) correlation between the mean of ages, maternal and paternal ages of DS cases, compared with both pretest and post-test Motor field (Tables 17,18).

Language

Mean post-test Language field values of total and groups 1&2 DS cases, showed a non-significant statistical (P=0.37, 0.26, respectively) increase, compared with those of pretest Language field. Meanwhile, there was a statistically non-significant (P=0.83) difference between mean post-test Language field value and pretest of group 3 DS cases (Table 13).

Pearson correlations between mean pretest Language developmental field values and those of the other pretest developmental fields, showed that showed a statistically highly significant positive correlation with Self-Help (P=.007) and Motor (P.005) fields, and a statistically significant (P=.033) positive correlation with Social developmental field. Meanwhile, there was a statistically non-significant (P>0.05) correlation between Language field and cognition (Table 14).

Mean pretest Language developmental field value showed a statistically significant (P=.011) positive correlation with post-test Cognitive field, otherwise, there was a statistically non-significant (P>0.05) correlation between pretest Language field and post-test Social, Self-Help, Motor, and Language fields (Table 15).

Pearson correlations among the mean post-test developmental fields values of DS cases showed that mean post-test Language field value had a significant correlation with Self-Help (P=.040) and Motor (P=0.027). On the other hand,… [END OF PREVIEW]

Four Different Ordering Options:

?
Which Option Should I Choose?

1.  Buy the full, 15-page paper:  $28.88

or

2.  Buy + remove from all search engines
(Google, Yahoo, Bing) for 30 days:  $38.88

or

3.  Access all 175,000+ papers:  $41.97/mo

(Already a member?  Click to download the paper!)

or

4.  Let us write a NEW paper for you!

Ask Us to Write a New Paper
Most popular!

Asperger's Syndrome Mentally Capable, Socially Inept Term Paper


Stress Impact an Autistic Child Term Paper


Ergonomics in UK Leisure Centres Term Paper


Autistic Children and the Effects on the Family Thesis


Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 Thesis


View 87 other related papers  >>

Cite This Research Paper:

APA Format

Intervention for Mentally Disabled Children.  (2010, September 20).  Retrieved May 20, 2019, from https://www.essaytown.com/subjects/paper/intervention-mentally-disabled-children/6421537

MLA Format

"Intervention for Mentally Disabled Children."  20 September 2010.  Web.  20 May 2019. <https://www.essaytown.com/subjects/paper/intervention-mentally-disabled-children/6421537>.

Chicago Format

"Intervention for Mentally Disabled Children."  Essaytown.com.  September 20, 2010.  Accessed May 20, 2019.
https://www.essaytown.com/subjects/paper/intervention-mentally-disabled-children/6421537.