Measurement of visual ability in children with cerebral palsy: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To identify and evaluate measures of visual ability used with children with cerebral palsy (CP). METHOD: Eight databases were searched for measures of visual ability. Key selection criteria for measures were: use with children with CP; focus of visual ability measurement at the Activities and Participation domain of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). The Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) Checklist was used to assess psychometric properties. RESULTS: From 6763 papers retrieved, 25 were relevant and 19 measures of visual ability were identified. Only 10 measures were supported with evidence of validity or reliability. No discriminative measure analogous to existing CP functional classification systems was found. No outcome measure valid for evaluation of visual abilities of children with CP was found. INTERPRETATION: Vision impairment is recognized as relevant to the functioning of children with CP; however, measurement of vision is most often focused at 'Body Function' levels, for example visual acuity. Measuring visual abilities in the Activities and Participation domain is important in considering how a child with CP functions in vision-related activities. The lack of psychometrically strong measures for visual ability is a gap in current clinical practices and research.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".