Stability of motor impairment in children with cerebral palsy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Classification of the quality and topographical pattern of motor impairment is used to describe cerebral palsy (CP). As an adjunct to a study characterizing the quality of life and participation of school-age children with C P, initial and follow-up classification of CP were compared. A cohort of 93 children (58 males, 35 females) were initially assessed at a mean age of 2 years 6 months (SD 2y 2mo) and re-assessed at 9 years 4 months (SD 2y 2mo) with a mean interval of 6 years 6 months (SD 2y 4mo) between assessments. Sixty children had Gross Motor Function Classification System levels I-III. All but one of the children were still classified has having CP at follow-up. Type of CP documented remained constant in 67 children (72%; 95% confidence interval 62-80). Clinical factors that were statistically significant (p<0.05) as possible predictors of CP subtype change were original classification of a non-spastic subtype or a non-spastic quadriparetic subtype. Change in CP subtype occurs in an appreciable minority of children with CP, which is likely to reflect a combination of intrinsic and extrinsic influences. Such change may challenge efforts to monitor the effects of interventions in this population.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".