MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2318512846 · doi:10.1097/pep.0000000000000245

Vestibular Assessments in Children With Global Developmental Delay

2016· article· en· W2318512846 on OpenAlexaff
Elizabeth Dannenbaum, Victoria Horne, Farwa Malik, Myriam Villeneuve, Lora Salvo, Gevorg Chilingaryan, Anouk Lamontagne

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Physical Therapy · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVestibular and auditory disorders
Canadian institutionsJewish Rehabilitation Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlobal developmental delayVestibular systemReliability (semiconductor)AudiologyMedicineTest (biology)Analysis of variancePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To compare results of 3 clinical vestibular tests between children with global developmental delay (GDD) and children with typical development (TD) and investigate the test-retest reliability. METHODS: Twenty children with GDD (aged 4.1-12.1 years) and 11 age-matched controls with TD participated. Participants with GDD underwent 2 sessions of testing. Each session consisted of the Clinical Test of Sensory Interaction and Balance (CTSIB), Dynamic Visual Acuity (DVA) test, and the modified Emory Clinical Vestibular Chair Test (m-ECVCT). RESULTS: Up to 33% of the children with GDD had abnormal DVA scores. m-ECVCT results of children with GDD demonstrated larger variance than children with TD. The CTSIB score was significantly reduced in the group with GDD. The test-retest reliability varied, with good reliability for the m-ECVCT and CTSIB, and fair reliability for the DVA. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest vestibular involvement in children in GDD. The clinical tests demonstrated moderate test-retest reliability.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.465

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.265 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric Physical TherapySame topicVestibular and auditory disordersFrench-language works237,207