CHAMGAP
VERIFIEDPassed the Codex final verification and publication gate. Evidence-verification cutoff: 2026-08-26. AI was used for research and drafting; the existence of all 1 cited sources was verified at the original page, followed by blind grading, adversarial audit, and build validation. Methodology v0.8.
Verdict No. 2915 · Search date 2026-08-26 · Methodology v0.8

High-dose pediatric constraint-induced movement therapy,
does it really help with Improved upper-extremity function in hemiparetic cerebral palsy?

30-Second Summary
C
Evidence Grade C · 54 · Safety acceptable
High-dose CIMT showed a favorable overall pattern, but prespecified individual primary results were not uniformly positive
Four adverse events occurred and were judged unrelated to treatment. High treatment intensity can burden children and families and should be individualized.
What the
research shows
Grade C, 54 points. CHAMP randomized 118 children aged 2 to 8 across usual care, 30- or 60-hour CIMT, and two constraint types, with three masked primary outcomes. The high-dose AHA contrast versus usual care failed at 23.7 points (95% CI -1.6 to 49.1). PDMS-2 VMI and QUEST DM showed significant six-month gains within high-dose groups, but their individual high-dose-versus-usual-care ANCOVAs were 6.7 (-0.8 to 14.2) and 1.4 (-0.6 to 3.5), respectively, both including zero. A separate multiple-endpoint rank test favored high dose overall.
What the
ads claim
CIMT is used in Korean pediatric rehabilitation practice. This trial primarily informs dose and constraint choices rather than proving that every child requires 60 hours.
*

Useful facts when choosing a product

  • High dose was 60 hours and moderate dose was 30 hours.
  • A central coordinator concealed the computer-generated allocation until consent.
  • Four adverse events were judged unrelated to treatment.
Gap Measurement · Verdict 2915 · C 54
What advertising claims
What independent, higher-quality research supports
△ GAP
01

What the research actually shows

The only confirmed listed defect is fewer than 200 participants: 118 children in five groups. Masked assessors measured all three primary outcomes, and four weeks of treatment was followed by assessment through six months, so an under-12-week defect does not apply; there is no evidence of at least 15% missingness. Individual ANCOVAs for AHA, PDMS-2 VMI, and QUEST DM are kept separate from the multiple-endpoint rank test. Split co-primary results support retaining coproimary_split.

02

Why this is classified as C (54)

This NIH-funded functional RCT had split co-primary results and one confirmed listed defect, its 118-person sample. The coproimary_split cap gives C, 54.

Counterpoint. The favorable high-dose rank composite relied on exploratory analyses selected after results review.

Rejudgment record. Source checked — Mixed functional primary outcomes with an exploratory overall high-dose pattern

Scoring profile behind this grade
EndpointPPatient-reported treatment goal - the symptom is the goal
ReplicationR1Single confirmatory trial
IndependenceI2Decisive evidence is publicly or non-profit funded
Effect sizeE+Meets the clinically important threshold

The scoring table and the verdict agree (C).

Sub-claim grades by effect

This ingredient is marketed for several effects. A single overall grade blends strong and weak claims together, so each effect is graded separately here. The overall grade reflects the strongest disconfirming or core claim.

Effect (sub-claim)GradeBasis
Overall upper-extremity functional improvementCHigh-dose groups showed the greatest overall pattern.
Superior AHA responseDThe estimate favored high dose, but the adjusted CI included zero.

Cross-check — AI research and Codex final gate

AI was used for research and drafting. Blind grading, adversarial audit, and the methodology boundary rules were then reapplied before Codex performed the final evidence, grade, copy, and build checks. If a grade cannot be narrowed, both evidence positions and their reasons are published.
03

Evidence Table

StudyDesignSampleFundingEndpointResultWeight
Study 1Multisite 2-by-2 factorial randomized comparative-effectiveness trial118US NIH/NICHD/NCMRR grant 1R01HD068345Masked AHA, PDMS-2 visual motor integration, QUEST dissociated movement, and parent-reported functionAHA high dose vs usual care was 23.7 points (95% CI -1.6 to 49.1), failing. PDMS-2 VMI and QUEST DM met significant six-month gains within high-dose groups, but individual high-dose-vs-usual-care ANCOVAs were 6.7 (-0.8 to 14.2) and 1.4 (-0.6 to 3.5), both including zero. A separate multiple-endpoint rank test favored high dose.Publicly funded pediatric functional RCT
§

Receipt — 1 References

All 1 cited sources were verified for existence at the original page (as of 2026-08-26).

Ramey SL, et al. Pediatrics. 2021;148:e20200338780. PMID: 34649982.
checked
Research and draft: AI used · Cross-check: blind grading and adversarial audit
Final verification and publication gate: Codex · Verification cutoff: 2026-08-26 · Corrections: none

Cite this verdict

Benefit of High-Dose Pediatric Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy for Upper-Extremity Function in Hemiparetic Cerebral Palsy Evidence Grade C card
[Chamgap] Benefit of High-Dose Pediatric Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy for Upper-Extremity Function in Hemiparetic Cerebral Palsy — Evidence Grade C·54. 1 cited sources checked. Source: https://chamgap.com/en/verdicts/joint-bone/high-dose-pediatric-cimt-hemiparetic-cerebral-palsy-upper-extremity-function/ · CC BY 4.0

CC BY 4.0 — free to use with attribution; do not distort grades, numbers, or verdict meaning.

!

What this document does and does not do

Chamgap is an information source. It reports what research has and has not confirmed; it does not tell readers what to take or buy. That decision belongs to readers and, when needed, medical or legal professionals. This verdict reflects literature available up to the search date and may change as new research appears. Nothing here is medical advice.