Using Cluster Analysis to Interpret the Variability of Gross Motor Scores of Children With Typical Development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Longitudinal research on gross motor percentile rank scores of children with typical development has documented intra-individual variability of scoring patterns. Clinically, interpreting these fluctuations presents a challenge for therapists. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the utility of cluster analysis as a technique to organize the gross motor scoring patterns of children with typical development into clinically relevant groups. DESIGN: This was a descriptive, exploratory study using data from 2 longitudinal studies. PARTICIPANTS: Sixty-six children with typical development participated in the study. METHODS: The children were assessed on the gross motor subscale of the Peabody Developmental Motor Scales at 9, 11, 13, 16, and 21 months of age and on the gross motor subscale of the Peabody Developmental Motor Scales, 2nd edition, at 4, 4.5, 5, and 5.5 years of age. Demographic and health data were collected. Parents were interviewed when the children were 8 years of age. Cluster analysis was conducted. Demographic and health data were compared across clusters. RESULTS: Four distinct and clinically relevant clusters were identified. A significant difference was found among the clusters for total number of illnesses. LIMITATIONS: The children in these analyses were at low risk for gross motor problems. Further research with a more high-risk sample is needed to validate the clinical utility of the identified clusters. CONCLUSIONS: Cluster analysis techniques may offer a mechanism to explore longitudinal data in physical therapy research. The techniques provided a mechanism to group data without losing the richness of information provided by the intra-individual variability of scoring patterns. Clinically, examination of distinct scoring patterns may lead to improved accuracy in screening for gross motor concerns compared with the traditional use of single-assessment cutoff points.
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 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".