23: Which Measure Should I Use?: Content Analysis Using the ICF Core Sets for Children and Youth with Cerebral Palsy
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Selecting appropriate measure(s) for clinical and/or research applications for children and youth with Cerebral Palsy (CP) poses many challenges. The newly developed International Classification of Functioning (ICF) Core Sets for children and youth with CP serve as universal guidelines for assessment, intervention and follow up. Importantly, the ICF Core Sets can guide professionals in selecting the most appropriate outcome measures to comprehensively capture information regarding children and youth with CP. To identify valid and reliable measures used with children and youth with CP, and to characterize the content of each measure using the ICF Core Sets for children and youth with CP as a framework. A systematic review of the literature was completed using multiple search engines likely to capture studies involving children with CP published between 1998 and 2013. Inclusion criteria consisted of: studies on children and/or youth with CP and interventional or observational studies published in English. All clearly defined outcome measures used in the studies were retrieved. Measures were classified as discriminative, predictive and evaluative. Psychometric properties were extracted when available. Construct of the measures identified in studies were linked to the ICF by two trained professionals. Subsequently, the content of each multiple-item measure (i.e. questionnaires) was analysed using the ICF Core Sets for children and youth with CP as a reference. Descriptive analysis was conducted in SPSS and content comparison was performed in Excel. Overall, 233 studies met inclusion criteria that described 80 multiple-item measures. Of these, 57 measures (72%) included reliability and validity testing. The majority of the measures were discriminative, generic and designed for school-aged children. Measures with proven psychometric properties contained considerable variability in the degree to which their content represented the ICF Core Sets for children and youth with CP. Primarily, measures covered the ICF components of body functions and activities and participation. Mental functions, mobility, and self-care were the most frequent areas represented by the measures. Overall, measures reflected few categories comprising the ICF Core Sets, ranging between 2% to 44% depending on the type of Core Set (comprehensive versus brief Core Set). A single measure covered the majority of the environmental factors included in the ICF Core Sets. Results from this content analysis provide novel information by applying the ICF Core Sets to characterize measures used with children and youth with CP. Few measures include items comprising the ICF Core Sets. As such, a combination of measures is needed to provide a comprehensive representation of the relevant areas of functioning included in the ICF Core Sets. Our results will guide professionals seeking appropriate measures to meet their research and clinical needs.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,051 | 0,142 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,013 | 0,014 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,006 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,005 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,006 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».