Children and youth with myelomeningocele’s independence in managing clean intermittent catheterization in familiar settings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To examine the ability of children and youth with myelomeningocele to independently manage clean intermittent catheterization. METHODS: There were 50 participants with myelomeningocele (5-18 years); 13 of them had also participated in a previous hospital-based study. Their abilities and interest in completing the toilet activity were examined at home or in school using an interview and the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM). Actual performance was observed and rated. Background variables were collected from medical records and KatAD+E tests. RESULTS: In total, 48% were observed to perform the toilet activity independently, in comparison with 74% who self-reported independence. Univariate analyses found KatAD+E could predict who was independent. COPM failed to do so. Ability to remain focused and ambulation were predictors of independence, but age, sex and IQ were not. Multivariable analysis found time to completion to be the strongest predictor of independence. Four children were independent in their familiar environment, but not in the hospital setting, and six of 13 children maintained focus only in their familiar environment. CONCLUSIONS: Interviews were not sufficiently accurate to assess independence in the toilet activity. Instead, observations including time to completion are recommended. The execution of the toilet activity is influenced by the environmental context.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".