Informing evidence‐based clinical practice guidelines for children with cerebral palsy at risk of osteoporosis: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: The aim of this systematic review was to inform evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for children with cerebral palsy (CP) and low bone mineral density (BMD). METHOD: A computer-assisted literature search was focused on low BMD in children with CP, and was limited to the following interventions: weight-bearing activities, bisphosphonate use, and vitamin D or calcium supplementation. Articles were classified according to American Academy of Neurology guidelines and recommendation classifications were given based on the evidence for the intervention increasing BMD and decreasing fragility fractures. Studies were included if they were English-language full-text studies, focused on children with CP, and included at least 10 participants receiving the studied interventions. RESULTS: Twenty-one articles underwent full-text review and data abstraction, including seven studies of weight-bearing activities, five studies of vitamin D or calcium supplementation, and nine studies of bisphosphonates administration. Overall, the evidence that bisphosphonates administration increases BMD was assessed as level B (probable) while the evidence that vitamin D or calcium supplementation does so was assessed as level C (possible); there was insufficient evidence to suggest that weight-bearing activities are an effective intervention to improve BMD. The evidence that bisphosphonates help to prevent fragility fractures was assessed as level C (possible); there was inadequate evidence to support the use of weight-bearing activities or vitamin D or calcium supplementation to decrease fragility fractures. INTERPRETATION: Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines were created outlining the suggested role of weight-bearing activities, vitamin D and calcium supplementation, and bisphosphonate use for children with CP with low BMD at risk of fragility fractures.
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 | 0.004 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".