The ICF-CY and Goal Attainment Scaling: Benefits of their combined use for pediatric practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: There is much heterogeneity and disconnect in the approaches used by service providers to conduct needs assessments, set goals and evaluate outcomes for clients receiving pediatric rehabilitation services. The purpose of this article is to describe how the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health-Child and Youth (ICF-CY) can be used in combination with Goal Attainment Scaling (GAS), an individualised measure of change, to connect the various phases of the therapeutic process to provide consistent clinical care that is family-centred, collaborative, well directed and accountable. METHOD: A brief description of both the ICF-CY and GAS as they pertain to pediatric rehabilitation is provided as background. An explanation is given of how the ICF-CY offers a framework through which clients, families and service providers can together identify the areas of clients' needs. In addition, the article discusses how the use of GAS facilitates translation of clients' identified needs into distinct, measurable goals set collaboratively by clients, their families and service providers. Examples of integrated GAS goals set for the various components of the ICF-CY are provided. The utility of GAS as a measure of clinical outcomes for individual clients is also discussed. CONCLUSIONS: Used in combination, the ICF-CY and GAS can serve to coordinate, simplify and standardise assessment and outcome evaluation practices for individual clients receiving pediatric rehabilitation services.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".