Refinement, Reliability, and Validity of the Segmental Assessment of Trunk Control
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
In Brief Purpose: The Segmental Assessment of Trunk Control (SATCo) provides a systematic method of assessing discrete levels of trunk control in children with motor disabilities. This study refined the assessment method and examined reliability and validity of the SATCo. Methods: After refining guidelines, 102 video recordings of the SATCo were made of 8 infants with typical development followed longitudinally from 3 to 9 months of age and 24 children with neuromotor disability with a mean age of 10 years 4 months. Eight researchers independently scored recordings. Results: Intraclass correlation coefficient values for interrater reliability were more than 0.84 and 0.98 across all data sets and all aspects of control. Tests of concurrent validity with the Alberta Infant Motor Scales resulted in coefficients ranging from 0.86 to 0.88. Conclusion: The SATCo is a reliable and valid measure allowing clinicians greater specificity in assessing trunk control. The authors report strong results in their study of the reliability and validity of their test of segmental control of the trunk. This work will provide clinicians with the ability to conduct more definitive assessments of trunk control in children with neuromuscular disorders.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it