Longitudinal trajectories and reference centiles for the impact of health conditions on daily activities of children with cerebral palsy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: First, to describe the impact of health conditions on daily activities over time in children with cerebral palsy (CP) and to create age-specific reference centiles. Second, to determine the amount of change typical over a 1-year period, across Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS) levels. METHOD: A prospective, cohort design, with five assessments over 2 years, involved 708 children with a confirmed diagnosis of CP participating in the On Track Study (396 males, 312 females; mean age 6y [SD 2y 7mo]; range 18mo-12y at first assessment; 32.1% in GMFCS level I, 22.7% in GMFCS level II, 11.2% in GMFCS level III, 18.2% in GMFCS level IV, 15.7% in GMFCS level V). The impact of health conditions on daily activities was assessed using the Child Health Conditions Questionnaire. Data were analyzed using mixed-effects models and quantile regression. RESULTS: Linear longitudinal trajectories describe the relatively stable impact of health conditions over time for each functional level for children aged 2 years to 12 years, with the lowest scores (least impact) in GMFCS level I and the highest scores (highest impact) in GMFCS level V. Centiles were created for children in each GMFCS level. A system to interpret the magnitude of change over time in centiles was developed. INTERPRETATION: Longitudinal trajectories of co-occurring health conditions assist with understanding children's prognoses. Centiles assist in understanding a child's experience relative to children in similar GMFCS levels. Guidelines are provided to determine if children are progressing 'as expected', 'better than expected' or 'more poorly than expected' in regard to the impact of health conditions on daily activities. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: For children with cerebral palsy, the mean impact of health conditions on daily activities is relatively stable. Significant intraindividual and interindividual variability for the impact of health conditions exists, which complicates prognosis. Centiles enable interpretation of the impact of health conditions relative to Gross Motor Function Classification System level.
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 | 0.007 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".