Activity Performance Curves of Individuals With Cerebral Palsy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Describe development curves of motor and daily activity performance in individuals with cerebral palsy (CP). METHODS: Participants with CP aged 1 to 20 years at baseline (n = 421) and Gross Motor Functioning Classification System (GMFCS) levels I to V (27% of participants with intellectual disability [ID]) were longitudinally assessed up to a 13-year follow-up period. Motor and daily activity performance were assessed using the relevant subdomains of the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales survey. Nonlinear mixed effects analyses were used, estimating the limit (average maximal performance level) and the age by which individuals reached 90% of the limit (age90). RESULTS: Limits of motor performance decreased with each lower functional level. Age90 for motor performance was reached at ∼6 to 8 years of age in children with GMFCS levels I to III, and at younger ages in those with lower functional levels. Limits of daily activity performance did not differ between individuals without ID with GMFCS levels I to III. The age90s of daily activities were reached between 11 and 14 (personal), 26 and 32 (domestic), and 22 and 26 years of age (community). Individuals with ID reached lower daily activity performance limits earlier. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals with CP continue to develop motor performance after gross motor capacity limits are reached. For those without ID, daily activities continue to develop into their 20s. Individuals who are severely affected functionally have the least favorable development of motor performance, and those with ID have the least favorable development of daily activity performance.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".