The Spanish version of the Alberta Infant Motor Scale: Validity and reliability analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Validity and reliability of the cross-cultural adaptive translation of the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS), to monitor gross motor development in infants from 0 to 18 months of age, were evaluated. METHODS: A cross-cultural translation was used to generate a Spanish version of the AIMS. Fifty infants at risk or with diagnosis of motor delay, 0-18 months of age, participated in this study. Two independent physical therapists scored infants on the AIMS. Concurrent validity was tested using the AIMS and the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development - III (Bayley - III). RESULTS: Reliability and the internal consistency were high (ICCs ranged from 0.94 to 1.00 and KR-20 ranged from 0.90 to 0.98, respectively). AIMS and Bayley - III scores correlated strongly (r = 0.97). CONCLUSION: The Spanish version of the AIMS presented excellent validity and reliability. Further studies are suggested in order to assess the AIMS in preterm babies.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".