Comparison of Patterns of Physical Activity and Sedentary Behavior Between Children With Cerebral Palsy and Children With Typical Development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Reduced participation in physical activity and increased time spent in sedentary behavior are associated with overweight, chronic disease, and disability. In order to optimize recommendations and interventions to increase physical activity and reduce sedentary behavior in children with cerebral palsy (CP), knowledge of their physical activity and sedentary behavior is needed. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to describe light, moderate, and vigorous physical activity and sedentary behavior in preadolescent children with and without CP and compare physical activity and sedentary behavior between the 2 groups. DESIGN: This was a cross-sectional study of 33 children, aged 6 to 10 years, with CP (Gross Motor Function Classification System [GMFCS] levels I-III) and 33 age- and sex-matched children with typical development. METHODS: Physical activity was measured using the RT3 accelerometer over 7 days. RESULTS: Children with CP spent more time in sedentary behavior and accumulated less total activity, moderate activity, vigorous activity, and sustained bouts of moderate-to-vigorous activity (MVPA). They also accumulated a fewer number of bouts of MVPA and vigorous activity, despite spending a similar amount of time in each bout. LIMITATIONS: The small number of children in GMFCS levels II and III did not allow for adjustment for GMFCS level when comparing physical activity between children with and without CP. CONCLUSIONS: Preadolescent children with CP spent less time in moderate and vigorous activity and more time in sedentary behavior than children with typical development. Children with CP also accumulated less continuous MVPA and vigorous activity as a result of achieving fewer sustained bouts of MVPA and vigorous activity throughout the day.
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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".