Accelerometry: A Feasible Method to Quantify Physical Activity in Ambulatory and Nonambulatory Adolescents with Cerebral Palsy
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective. To determine the feasibility of physical activity monitoring in adolescents with cerebral palsy (CP). Methods. A convenience sample of ambulatory and non-ambulatory adolescents (N = 23; 17 males, 6 females; mean age 13.5 y, SD 2.6 y; Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS) distribution: n = 9 Level I, n = 5 Level II, n = 5 Level III, n = 4 Level IV) was recruited. Physical activity (PA) was objectively assessed using the ActiGraph GT1M activity monitor. Discomfort or adverse effects of wearing the accelerometers were recorded by participants. Levels of physical activity were determined as total PA, light PA (LPA), moderate PA (MPA), moderate-to-vigorous (MVPA), and vigorous PA (VPA) using cut-points recently validated for CP. Results. Most participants showed little reluctance. Mean daily MVPA for all participants was 30.7 minutes (SD 30.3), which corresponded to 2.7 (SD 2.4) minutes of MVPA per hour or 4.5% (SD 3.9) of the total monitoring time. Total PA and MVPA were greatest in ambulatory youth (GMFCS levels I and II) compared with youth who use a walking aid or wheelchair (GMFCS levels III and IV) (P < 0.05). Conclusion(s). The results support the use of the accelerometer as a feasible and useful measure of activity in ambulatory and nonambulatory adolescents with CP.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it