Identification of a core set of exercise tests for children and adolescents with cerebral palsy: a Delphi survey of researchers and clinicians
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Evidence-based recommendations regarding which exercise tests to use in children and adolescents with cerebral palsy (CP) are lacking. This makes it very difficult for therapists and researchers to choose the appropriate exercise-related outcome measures for this group. This study aimed to identify a core set of exercise tests for children and adolescents with CP. METHOD: Fifteen experts (10 physical therapists/researchers and five exercise physiologists; three from the Netherlands, two from the USA, one from the UK, five from Canada, and four from Australia) participated in a Delphi survey which took four stages to achieve a consensus. Based on the information that was collected during the survey, a core set of measures was identified for levels I to IV of the Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS). RESULTS: For children with CP classified at GMFCS levels I and II, tests were identified for two motor skills (walking and cycling). For the subgroup of children with CP classified at GMFCS level III, the tests that were identified related to walking, cycling, and arm cranking. For children with CP classified at GMFCS level IV, the tests included in the core set were related to cycling and arm cranking. INTERPRETATION: The core set will help physical therapists, exercise physiologists, and other health professionals who work with children and adolescents with CP to decide which test(s) to use in clinical practice or research. This will facilitate comparability of results across studies and clinical programmes.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".