Prevention of hip displacement in children with cerebral palsy: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To conduct a systematic review and evaluate the quality of evidence for interventions to prevent hip displacement in children with cerebral palsy (CP). METHOD: A systematic review was performed using American Academy of Cerebral Palsy and Developmental Medicine (AACPDM) and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology. Searches were completed in seven electronic databases. Studies were included if participants had CP and the effectiveness of the intervention was reported using a radiological measure. Results of orthopaedic surgical interventions were excluded. RESULTS: Twenty-four studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria (4 botulinum neurotoxin A; 2 botulinum neurotoxin A and bracing; 1 complementary and alternative medicine; 1 intrathecal baclofen; 1 obturator nerve block; 8 positioning; 7 selective dorsal rhizotomy). There was significant variability in treatment dosages, participant characteristics, and duration of follow-up among the studies. Overall, the level of evidence was low. No intervention in this review demonstrated a large treatment effect on hip displacement. INTERPRETATION: The level and quality of evidence for all interventions aimed at slowing or preventing hip displacement is low. There is currently insufficient evidence to support or refute the use of the identified interventions to prevent hip displacement or dislocation in children and young people with CP. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: High-quality evidence on prevention of hip displacement is lacking. No recommendations can be made for preventing hip displacement in children with cerebral palsy because of poor-quality evidence. High-quality, prospective, longitudinal studies investigating the impact of interventions on hip displacement are required.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".