Coordination and Balance in Children with Birth-Related Brachial Plexus Injury: A Preliminary Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Most children with severe birth-related brachial plexus injury (BRBPI) have some functional impairment, but information on the impact of BRBPI on coordination and balance is limited. The study's purpose was to determine whether children with BRBPI exhibit deficits in body coordination and balance. METHOD: A prospective cohort study involving 39 children with BRBPI aged 5-15 years was conducted. Range of motion, strength, active movement, and balance and coordination motor skills were assessed using the Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency, Second Edition (BOT-2), and the Movement Assessment Battery for Children-Second Edition (MABC-2). A self-report measure of physical disability, the Activities Scale for Kids-Performance Version (ASKp), was also administered. RESULTS: Participants scored a mean of 44.72 on the BOT-2 Body Coordination composite subtest; scores can range from 20 to 80. Eleven participants (28.2%) scored below average on this test. Participants scored a mean of 7.3 on the Balance subtest of the MABC-2; scores can range from 1 to 19. Twenty-six participants (66.7%) scored below average on this test. Of 38 participants, 25 (65.8%) had an ASKp score indicating some level of disability (<95/100); we found a statistically significant difference in balance (p=0.007) between these 25 participants and those without disability (ASKp score 95-100). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of our study population scored in the categories of at risk or significant difficulty for balance on the MABC-2. Balance rehabilitation may be a valuable treatment adjunct for children with BRBPI.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".