MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2471588876 · doi:10.1177/2050312116658908

Preliminary study of novel, timed walking tests for children with spina bifida or cerebral palsy

2016· article· en· W2471588876 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueSAGE Open Medicine · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of SaskatchewanToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of TorontoRegina Qu'Appelle Health Region
FundersUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsSpina bifidaCerebral palsyIntraclass correlationMedicinePhysical therapyAmbulatoryGross Motor Function Classification SystemPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPediatricsPsychometricsSurgeryClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Walking assessment is an important aspect of rehabilitation practice; yet, clinicians have few psychometrically sound options for evaluating walking in highly ambulatory children. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the validity and reliability of two new measures of walking function-the Obstacles and Curb tests-relative to the 10-Meter Walk test and Timed Up and Go test in children with spina bifida or cerebral palsy. METHODS: A total of 16 ambulatory children with spina bifida (n=9) or cerebral palsy (n=7) (9 boys; mean age 7years, 7months; standard deviation 3years, 4months) and 16 age- and gender-matched typically developing children participated. Children completed the walking tests, at both self-selected and fast speeds, twice. To evaluate discriminative validity, scores were compared between typically developing and spina bifida/cerebral palsy groups. Within the spina bifida/cerebral palsy group, inter-test correlations evaluated convergent validity and intraclass correlation coefficients evaluated within-session test-retest reliability. RESULTS: At fast speeds, all tests showed discriminative validity (p<0.006 for typically developing and spina bifida/cerebral palsy comparisons) and convergent validity (rho=0.81-0.90, p⩽0.001, for inter-test correlations). At self-selected speeds, only the Obstacles test discriminated between groups (p=0.001). Moderately strong correlations (rho=0.73-0.78, p⩽0.001) were seen between the 10-Meter Walk test, Curb test, and Timed Up and Go test. Intraclass correlation coefficients ranged from 0.81 to 0.97, with higher test-retest reliability for tests performed at fast speeds rather than self-selected speeds. CONCLUSION: The Obstacles and Curb tests are promising measures for assessing walking in this population. Performing tests at fast walking speeds may improve their validity and test-retest reliability for children with spina bifida/cerebral palsy.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.290
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.290 · 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