Reliability of the Dutch‐language version of the Communication Function Classification System and its association with language comprehension and method of communication
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: The aims of this study were to determine the intra- and interrater reliability of the Dutch-language version of the Communication Function Classification System (CFCS-NL) and to investigate the association between the CFCS level and (1) spoken language comprehension and (2) preferred method of communication in children with cerebral palsy (CP). METHOD: Participants were 93 children with CP (50 males, 43 females; mean age 7y, SD 2y 6mo, range 2y 9mo-12y 10mo; unilateral spastic [n=22], bilateral spastic [n=51], dyskinetic [n=15], ataxic [n=3], not specified [n=2]; Gross Motor Function Classification System level I [n=16], II [n=14], III, [n=7], IV [n=24], V [n=31], unknown [n=1]), recruited from rehabilitation centres throughout the Netherlands. Because some centres only contributed to part of the study, different numbers of participants are presented for different aspects of the study. Parents and speech and language therapists (SLTs) classified the communication level using the CFCS. Kappa was used to determine the intra- and interrater reliability. Spearman's correlation coefficient was used to determine the association between CFCS level and spoken language comprehension, and Fisher's exact test was used to examine the association between the CFCS level and method of communication. RESULTS: Interrater reliability of the CFCS-NL between parents and SLTs was fair (r=0.54), between SLTs good (r=0.78), and the intrarater (SLT) reliability very good (r=0.85). The association between the CFCS and spoken language comprehension was strong for SLTs (r=0.63) and moderate for parents (r=0.51). There was a statistically significant difference between the CFCS level and the preferred method of communication of the child (p<0.01). Also, CFCS level classification showed a statistically significant difference between parents and SLTs (p<0.01). INTERPRETATION: These data suggest that the CFCS-NL is a valid and reliable clinical tool to classify everyday communication in children with CP. Preferably, professionals should classify the child's CFCS level in collaboration with the parents to acquire the most comprehensive information about the everyday communication of the child in various situations both with familiar and with unfamiliar partners.
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 | 0.014 | 0.044 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".