MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3048067314 · doi:10.1111/dmcn.14648

Functional electrical stimulation cycling, goal‐directed training, and adapted cycling for children with cerebral palsy: a randomized controlled trial

2020· article· en· W3048067314 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ellen Armstrong, Roslyn N. Boyd, Sean A. Horan, Megan Kentish, Robert S. Ware, Christopher P. Carty

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Medicine & Child Neurology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAdvance QueenslandNational Health and Medical Research CouncilGriffith University
KeywordsCerebral palsyPhysical therapyRandomized controlled trialCyclingMedicineGross Motor Function Classification SystemConfidence intervalPhysical medicine and rehabilitationGross motor skillPsychologyMotor skillSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: To test the efficacy of functional electrical stimulation (FES) cycling, goal-directed training, and adapted cycling, compared with usual care, to improve function in children with cerebral palsy (CP). METHOD: The intervention was delivered between 2017 and 2019 and included three sessions per week for 8 weeks (2×1h sessions at a children's hospital, and 1h home programme/week). Hospital sessions included 30 minutes of FES cycling and 30 minutes of goal-directed training. Home programmes included goal-directed training and adapted cycling. The comparison group continued usual care. Primary outcomes were gross motor function assessed by the Gross Motor Function Measure (GMFM) and goal performance/satisfaction assessed using the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM). Secondary outcomes were sit-to-stand and activity capacity, participation in home, school, and community activities, and power output. Linear regression was used to determine the between-group mean difference immediately post-training completion after adjusting for baseline scores. RESULTS: This randomized controlled trial included 21 participants (mean age=10y 3mo, standard deviation [SD]=3y; Gross Motor Function Classification System level: II=7, III=6, IV=8) who were randomized to the intervention (n=11) or usual care group (n=10). Between-group differences at T2 favoured the intervention group for GMFM-88 (mean difference=7.4; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.3-12.6; p=0.007), GMFM-66 (mean difference=5.9; 95% CI: 3.1-8.8; p<0.001), COPM performance (mean difference=4.4; 95% CI: 3.9-5.3; p<0.001) and satisfaction (mean difference=5.2; 95% CI: 4.0-6.4; p<0.001). INTERPRETATION: Children with CP achieved meaningful functional improvements after FES cycling, goal-directed training, and adapted cycling training. Cycling programmes for children with CP should be individualized and goal directed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.231 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations43
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmental Medicine & Child NeurologySame topicCerebral Palsy and Movement DisordersFrench-language works237,207