SF36 physical functioning scale and 2-minute walk test advocated as core qualifiers to evaluate physical functioning in patients with late-onset sequelae of poliomyelitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To select a questionnaire and walking capacity test based on comparison of clinimetric properties and mutual association to be used as "core" qualifiers for physical functioning in patients with late-onset sequelae of poliomyelitis. DESIGN: Repeated-measures at 3-week intervals. SUBJECTS: An unselected sample of 57 patients with late-onset sequelae of poliomyelitis from a prospective cohort study. METHODS: Physical functioning scales from Short Form-36 (SF36-PF), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC-PF) and Nottingham Health Profile (NHP-PM). Timed-Up-and-Go test, 10-m walking at self-preferred and maximum speed, and 2-min walk test. RESULTS: Test-retest reliability of SF36-PF and WOMAC-PF was good (intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) 0.92 and 0.89, respectively), sufficient for NHP-PM (ICC 0.74) and excellent for walking tests (ICC 0.93-0.96). The smallest detectable changes were 18.4 and 16.5, respectively, for WOMAC-PF and SF36-PF, and 26.7 for NHP-PM. The smallest detectable change was best for the 2-min walk test (22.9 m). Correlation coefficients between questionnaires and walking tests ranged from 0.32 to 0.69, with the highest correlation between the SF36-PF and 2-min walk test. CONCLUSION: The SF36-PF and 2-min walk test are recommended as core qualifiers for physical functioning, the major increasing disability in late-onset sequelae of poliomyelitis, to assess perceived physical performance and walking capacity in research and clinical practice.
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 | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".