Compound muscle action potential and motor function in children with spinal muscular atrophy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reliable outcome measures that reflect the underlying disease process and correlate with motor function in children with SMA are needed for clinical trials. Maximum ulnar compound muscle action potential (CMAP) data were collected at two visits over a 4-6-week period in children with SMA types II and III, 2-17 years of age, at four academic centers. Primary functional outcome measures included the Modified Hammersmith Functional Motor Scale (MHFMS) and MHFMS-Extend. CMAP negative peak amplitude and area showed excellent discrimination between the ambulatory and non-ambulatory SMA cohorts (ROC = 0.88). CMAP had excellent test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.96-0.97, n = 64) and moderate to strong correlation with the MHFMS and MHFMS-Extend (r = 0.61-0.73, n = 68, P < 0.001). Maximum ulnar CMAP amplitude and area is a feasible, valid, and reliable outcome measure for use in pediatric multicenter clinical trials in SMA. CMAP correlates well with motor function and has potential value as a relevant surrogate for disease status.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".