Test–retest reliability of the 10‐metre fast walk test and 6‐minute walk test in ambulatory school‐aged children with cerebral palsy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Short-term test-retest reliability of the 10-metre fast walk test (10mFWT) and 6-minute walk test (6MWT) was evaluated in 31 ambulatory children with cerebral palsy (CP), with subgroup analyses in Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS) Levels I (n=9), II (n=8), and III (n=14). Sixteen females and 15 males participated, mean age 9 years 5 months (SD 3y 7mo, range 4y 3mo-18y 2mo). Twenty had spastic diplegia, while the others had another form of CP. Retest interval varied from 1 to 4 weeks (mean 10.6d [SD 6.4]). Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) estimated reliability. The 10mFWT ICC was 0.81 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.65-0.90) across participants, and >0.59 in GMFCS subgroups (95% CI lower bound >0.01). The 6MWT ICC was 0.98, and >0.90 in GMFCS subgroups (95% CI lower bound >0.64). Bland-Altman plots indicated bias towards higher 6MWT retest distances in GMFCS Level I. Minimum detectable change (95% CI) was 61.9, 64.0, and 47.4m for the 6MWT within GMFCS Levels I, II, and III respectively. The conclusion is that while the 10mFWT showed inadequate test-retest reliability given its wide 95% CI, the 6MWT demonstrated good to excellent reliability. Investigation of the need for a practice walk when administering the 6MWT with children in GMFCS Level I is recommended to establish their fastest pace.
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 | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".