Autonomy in participation in cerebral palsy from childhood to adulthood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To determine the long-term development of autonomy in participation of individuals with cerebral palsy (CP) without intellectual disability. METHOD: Individuals with CP (n=189, 117 males, 72 females; mean age [SD] 21y 11mo [4y 11mo], range 12-34y); were assessed cross-sectionally (46%) or up to four times (54%), between the ages of 12 and 34 years. Autonomy in participation was classified using phase 3 of the Rotterdam Transition Profile. A logistic generalized estimating equation regression model was used to analyse autonomy in six domains (independent variables: age, Gross Motor Function Classification System [GMFCS] level, and interaction between age and GMFCS level). Proportions of autonomy were compared to references using binomial tests (p<0.05). RESULTS: In most domains, over 90% of participants (n=189, 400 observations, 80% in GMFCS levels I and II) reached autonomy in participation in their late twenties, except for intimate/sexual relationships. Those in GMFCS levels III to V compared to those in GMFCS levels I and II had less favourable development of autonomy in the transportation, intimate relationships, employment, and housing domains, and more favourable development in the finances domain. Compared to references, fewer individuals with CP were autonomous in participation. INTERPRETATION: This knowledge of autonomy may guide the expectations of young people with CP and their caregivers. Furthermore, rehabilitation professionals should address autonomy development in intimate relationships, employment, and housing, especially in individuals with lower gross motor function. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: Individuals with cerebral palsy without intellectual disability achieved autonomy in most participation domains. Regarding intimate relationships, they continued to have less experience compared to age-matched references. Development of autonomy was less favourable for individuals in Gross Motor Function Classification System levels III to V.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".