Reference Values for Aerobic Fitness in Children, Adolescents, and Young Adults Who Have Cerebral Palsy and Are Ambulatory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Very few objective data exist regarding aerobic performance in young people with cerebral palsy (CP). The characterization of aerobic fitness could provide baseline and outcome measures for the rehabilitation of young people with CP. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to provide reference values for aerobic fitness in a group of children, adolescents, and young adults who had CP and who were classified at Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS) level I or II. Data were collected with 10-m shuttle run tests. DESIGN: This investigation was a cross-sectional observational study conducted between August 2008 and June 2009. METHODS: Reference values were established using data from a total of 306 children, adolescents, and young adults who had CP, who were 6 to 20 years old, and who were recruited from 26 rehabilitation centers in the Netherlands, Switzerland, Australia, Canada, and the United States. A total of 211 participants were classified at GMFCS level I (mean age=12.2 years, SD=3.0), and 95 were classified at GMFCS level II (mean age=12.4 years, SD=3.2); 181 were male, and 125 were female. Aerobic fitness was reflected by the level achieved on the 10-m shuttle run tests. RESULTS: On the basis of a total of 306 assessments from the 10-m shuttle run tests, 4 reference curves were created. LIMITATIONS: The limitation of this study is the cross-sectional nature of the design. CONCLUSIONS: This study provided height-related reference values for aerobic fitness in children, adolescents, and young adults who had CP, who were 6 to 20 years old, and who were classified at GMFCS level I or II. Generalized additive models for location, scale, and shape were used to construct centile curves. These curves are clinically relevant and provide a user-friendly method for the prediction of aerobic fitness in young people with CP.
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) | 0.000 | 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".