Limb distribution, motor impairment, and functional classification of cerebral palsy
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study explored the relationships between the Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS), limb distribution, and type of motor impairment. Data used were collected in the Ontario Motor Growth study, a longitudinal cohort study with a population-based sample of children with cerebral palsy (CP) in Canada (n=657; age 1 to 13 years at study onset). The majority (87.8%) of children with hemiplegia were classified as level I. Children with a bilateral syndrome were represented in all GMFCS levels, with most in levels III, IV, and V. Classifications by GMFCS and 'limb distribution' or by GMFCS and 'type of motor impairment' were statistically significantly associated (Pearson's chi2 p<0.001), though the correlation for limb distribution (two categories) by GMFCS was low (tau-b=0.43). An analysis of function (GMFCS) by impairment (limb distribution) indicates that the latter clinical characteristic does not add prognostic value over GMFCS. Although classification of CP by impairment level is useful for clinical and epidemiological purposes, the value of these subgroups as an indicator of mobility is limited in comparison with the classification of severity with the GMFCS.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it