Inter‐relationships of functional status in cerebral palsy: analyzing gross motor function, manual ability, and communication function classification systems in children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To investigate the relationships among the Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS), Manual Ability Classification System (MACS), and Communication Function Classification System (CFCS) in children with cerebral palsy (CP). METHOD: Using questionnaires describing each scale, mothers reported GMFCS, MACS, and CFCS levels in 222 children with CP aged from 2 to 17 years (94 females, 128 males; mean age 8 y, SD 4). Children were referred from pediatric developmental/behavioral, physiatry, and child neurology clinics, in the USA, for a case-control study of the etiology of CP. Pairwise relationships among the three systems were assessed using Spearman's correlation coefficients (r(s) ), stratifying by age and CP topographical classifications. RESULTS: Correlations among the three functional assessments were strong or moderate. GMFCS levels were highly correlated with MACS levels (r(s) = 0.69) and somewhat less so with CFCS levels (r(s) = 0.47). MACS and CFCS were also moderately correlated (r(s) = 0.54). However, many combinations of functionality were found. Of the 125 possible combinations of the three five-point systems, 62 were found in these data. INTERPRETATION: Use of all three classification systems provides a more comprehensive picture of the child's function in daily life than use of any one alone. This resulting functional profile can inform both clinical and research purposes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".