MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2107065767 · doi:10.1177/0883073813488942

Pursuit of Complementary and Alternative Medicine Treatments in Adolescents With Cerebral Palsy

2013· article· en· W2107065767 on OpenAlexaffabout
Annette Majnemer, Keiko Shikako‐Thomas, Michael Shevell, Chantal Poulin, Lucyna Lach, Norbert Schmitz, Mary Law

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Child Neurology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsDouglas Mental Health University InstituteMcGill UniversityMcMaster UniversityMontreal Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCerebral palsyMassageOsteopathyMedicinePhysical therapyHyperbaric oxygenQuarter (Canadian coin)Family medicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationAlternative medicinePsychologyPediatricsSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study determined the extent to which parents of adolescents with cerebral palsy seek out complementary and alternative medicine services. A regional sample of 166 adolescents (15.5 ± 2.4 years) with cerebral palsy were recruited. Parents completed a questionnaire identifying the complementary and alternative medicine services received over the past year. Most (73.2%) did not currently utilize any of the listed services; 7.3% used 2 or more services. The most commonly used services were massage (15.4%), hyperbaric oxygen (9.6%), and osteopathy (5.7%). Youth with limited hand function were more likely (P = .01) to undergo hyperbaric oxygen. Massage therapy services were more frequent in youth with greater activity limitations (P < .005). Sociodemographic factors were not predictive of use. Approximately one quarter of families sought out these services for their adolescents with cerebral palsy. Many are expensive privately funded treatments. Physicians should openly discuss these options with families, highlighting the current state of knowledge on their efficacy.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations21
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Child NeurologySame topicCerebral Palsy and Movement DisordersFrench-language works237,207