MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090272765 · doi:10.2340/16501977-0919

Could mobilty performance measures be used to evaluate wheelchair skills?

2012· article· en· W2090272765 on OpenAlexaff
Didier Pradon, Nicolas Pinsault, Raphaël Zory, François Routhier

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Rehabilitation Medicine · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWheelchairIntraclass correlationReliability (semiconductor)Physical therapySpinal cord injuryPhysical medicine and rehabilitationTest (biology)PsychologySession (web analytics)Manual wheelchairMedicinePsychometricsComputer scienceSpinal cordDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To determine the relationship between mobility performance measures and Wheelchair Skill Test (WST) scores and to establish the test-retest and inter-rater reliability of these measures. METHODS: Forty patients with spinal cord injury participated in this study. Subjects performed the Wheelchair Skill Test and mobility performance tests: maximal velocity (Vmax), spontaneous velocity (Vspont) and a 10-m back and forth slalom (Stime). Eighteen patients with spinal cord injury participated in a second testing session to evaluate test-retest reliability and, among these patients, 8 participated in a third testing session to evaluate inter-rater reliability. RESULTS: Spearman's correlation coefficients calculated between WST and Vmax, Vspont and Stime were high and significant (p < 0.05). The intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC (2.1)) evaluating test-retest reliability for Vmax, Vspont and Stime were 0.94, 0.84 and 0.88, respectively. The ICC evaluating inter-rater reliability for Vmax, Vspont and Stime were 0.92, 0.92 and 0.95, respectively. Reliability results were confirmed by Bland-Altman plots. CONCLUSION: Vmax and Stime could be used to evaluate wheelchair skills and to create a new scale, whereas Vspont is the least appropriate of these measurements to describe wheelchair skills.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.082
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.353 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Rehabilitation MedicineSame topicSpinal Cord Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207