**3. Results**

Based on the examinations, statistical differences between the scores observed at the three timepoints—at the start of the DAT (Exam 1), at the end of the therapy program (i.e., after 10 months) (Exam 2), and at a two-month follow-up (Exam 3)—were assessed in the relevant group of children.

**Hypothesis 1**. *Children with intellectual disability, participating in an educational program supplemented with DAT, achieve improvement in attention and concentration, motor planning, spatial orientation, and sense of touch, in assessments carried out at the end of the educational program and at a two-month follow up*.

It was shown that the results obtained by the DAT group in the category of finger identification, measured at the three timepoints (before the DAT, at the end of the DAT, and at a two-month follow-up) were not the same (*p* < 0.001). In order to identify statistically significant differences between the measurements at the specific timepoints, a post-hoc analysis was performed using Dunn's test, appropriate for Friedman's ANOVA. The analysis showed differences in the results between the measurements performed before and immediately after the therapy, measurements before the DAT and at the two-month follow-up, as well as measurements immediately after the DAT and at the two-month follow-up. Each subsequent measurement showed higher scores. Before the therapy the children achieved the lowest results; in the measurement immediately after the therapy there was a statistically significant increase and subsequently, at the two-month follow-up, again the scores were significantly higher relative to the short-term effect (Table 2).


**Table 2.** Identification—analyses of the measurements performed over time.

CI: confidence interval.

It was shown that the results obtained by the DAT group in the category of postural imitation, measured at the three timepoints (before the DAT, at the end of the DAT, and at a two-month follow-up) were not the same (*p* < 0.001). The post hoc (Dunn's) test showed there were differences between the results measured before DAT and at the two-month follow-up, as well as the results measured immediately after the DAT and at the two-month follow-up. The analysis did not confirm statistically significant differences between the results measured before the DAT and immediately after the DAT. The measurement before the DAT identified the lowest scores. Immediately after the DAT, the scores improved only slightly, however the further increase in the results, reflected by the difference in the measurements immediately after the DAT and at the two-month follow-up, was statistically significant. The result identified in the final measurement differed significantly from the baseline (Table 3).


**Table 3.** Postural imitation—analyses of the measurements performed over time.

It was shown that the results obtained by the DAT group in the category of kinaesthesia, measured at the three timepoints (before the DAT, at the end of the DAT, and at a two-month follow-up) were not the same (*p* < 0.001). The post hoc (Dunn's) test showed there were differences between the results measured before DAT and immediately after the DAT, as well as the results measured before the DAT and at the two-month follow-up. The analysis did not confirm statistically significant differences between the results measured immediately after the DAT and at the two-month follow-up. The measurement before the DAT identified the lowest scores. Subsequently, there was a significant increase in the measurement immediately after the DAT and the effect was maintained, despite a small decrease, in the measurement at the two-month follow-up (Table 4).


**Table 4.** Kinaesthesia—analyses of the measurements performed over time.

It was shown that the results obtained by the DAT group in the Bourdon–Wiersma Dot Cancellation Test, measured at the three timepoints (before the DAT, at the end of the DAT, and at a two-month follow-up) were not the same (*p* < 0.001). The post hoc (Dunn's) test showed there were differences between the results measured before DAT and immediately after the DAT, as well as the results measured before the DAT and at the two-month follow-up. The analysis did not confirm statistically significant differences between the results measured immediately after the DAT and at the two-month follow-up. The measurement before the DAT identified the lowest scores. Subsequently there was a significant increase in the measurement immediately after the DAT and the effect was maintained, but without a significant increase, in the measurement at the two-month follow-up (Table 5).


**Hypothesis 2**. *Improvement in the DAT study group is significantly greater than in the non-DAT control group*.

The next part of the analyses involved comparison of the results achieved by the children in the DAT group at each stage of the therapy program to the scores of the children in the control group.

As regards finger identification the DAT group and the controls did not di ffer in the measurement before and immediately after the DAT, however the measurement two months after the DAT was completed showed statistically significant di fferences between the groups (*p* < 0.001), reflecting greater gains in the DAT group. The finding was confirmed by assessing e ffect size with Cohen's d. Hence, the short-term changes in the two groups were comparable, however the performance of the DAT group reflected statistically better long-term e ffects possibly resulting from the therapy (Table 6).

No di fferences related to kinaesthesia were found between the DAT group and the controls in the measurements before and immediately after the DAT, and at the two-month follow-up. The finding was confirmed by assessing e ffect size with Cohen's d (Table 7).

The scores in postural imitation test showed the DAT group and the controls did not di ffer in the measurements before and immediately after the DAT. On the other hand, the measurement at a two-month follow-up identified statistically significant di fferences (*p* < 0.001), with higher scores achieved by the DAT group. The finding was confirmed by assessing e ffect size with Cohen's d. Hence, the short-term improvement in the two groups was comparable, however the scores of the DAT group seem to reflect statistically higher long-term e ffects of the therapy (Table 8).

As regards the Bourdon–Wiersma Dot Cancellation Test, the DAT group and the controls did not di ffer in the measurements at any stage of the therapy program. The finding was confirmed by assessing e ffect size with Cohen's d (Table 9).

**Hypothesis 3**. *E*ff*ects of education supplemented with DAT are long-lasting. Children additionally receiving DAT after a two-month break in the education program present greater improvement compared to the non-DAT control group*.

Comparative analysis examined relationships between measurement II and I (short-term effect—before the DAT versus immediately after the DAT) and measurement III and II (long-term effect—immediately after the DAT versus two-month follow-up).

As for the e ffect size identified in measurements I and II, as well as II and III, no significant di fferences were found in finger identification and in the Bourdon–Wiersma Dot Cancellation Test (*p* > 0.05). This means that immediately after DAT and at the two-month follow-up the children achieved similar results.

Assessment of the scores in postural imitation test showed that the long-term e ffect, reflected by measurement III versus II, was significantly greater than the short-term e ffect.

The related analyses of the scores in the kinaesthesia test showed a positive short-term e ffect and a negative long-term e ffect (*p* = 0.009), (Table 10). However, the previous findings (Table 3) showed that this decrease was not significant from the viewpoint of the therapy e ffectiveness because the final effect was similar to that observed immediately after the DAT and the scores were higher than those achieved before the DAT (Table 10).


Control group 30 9.50 8.49 10.51 9.50 5.00 15.00 8.00 12.00 2.70

Control group 30 9.40 8.49 10.31 10.00 4.00 14.00 8.00 11.00 2.43

Two-month follow-up 30 11.73 11.13 12.34 12.00 8.00 13.00 11.00 13.00 1.62 1.15 3.89 <0.001 1.15

**Table 6.** Finger identification—comparison of the scores achieved by the DAT group and the controls.

**Table 7.** Kinaesthesia—comparison of DAT group scores achieved over time to the results of the controls.







