Quantification of Physical Activity and Sedentary Time in Adults with Cerebral Palsy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine objective and subjective quantification of habitual physical activity (HPA) and sedentary time in ambulatory and nonambulatory adults with cerebral palsy (CP). METHODS: We recruited a clinical sample of adults with CP (N = 42; 21 women; mean (SD) age, 33.5 (12.3) yr; Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS) distribution: level I (n = 5), level II (n = 9), level III (n = 10), level IV (n = 11), and level V (n = 7). Objective measures of HPA and sedentary time were obtained by using ActiGraph GT3X accelerometers at both hip and wrist sites. Three previously established cut-point values distinguishing light physical activity (LPA) and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) were evaluated across GMFCS levels. The concurrent validity of the self-report Physical Activity Recall Assessment for People with Spinal Cord Injury (PARA-SCI) was assessed for LPA and MVPA intensities in GMFCS levels II-V. RESULTS: Participants showed little reluctance to wearing accelerometers; one participant reported discomfort. Nonambulatory adults (GMFCS levels IV-V) differed from ambulatory adults (GMFCS levels I-III) for recorded activity counts (hip and wrist sites), minutes of MVPA with each cut-point value, and breaks from sedentary time (all P < 0.05). For the same measures, adults in GMFCS level III also differed from GMFCS level I (all P < 0.05). The PARA-SCI correlated significantly with accelerometer-derived minutes of MVPA per day (r = 0.396; P = 0.014) and per hour of monitoring time (r = 0.356; P = 0.027). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support the use of accelerometers to objectively measure HPA and sedentary behavior in adults with CP across the severity spectrum, regardless of cut-point implementation. The PARA-SCI is a valid tool to capture subjectively reported patterns of MVPA in adults with CP who are GMFCS levels II-V.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".