Preliminary study of novel, timed walking tests for children with spina bifida or cerebral palsy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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 | 0.005 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".