Reproducibility of the Six-Minute Walk Test in Children and Youth With Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: While the 6-minute walk test is increasingly being used in research to evaluate submaximal exercise capacity of children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), psychometric properties with this population have not been well evaluated. We undertook this study to evaluate reproducibility (agreement and test-retest reliability) and to determine standard error of measurement (SEM) and smallest detectable difference (SDD) in children and youth with JIA. METHODS: Participants (n = 22, mean ± SD age 13.1 ± 1.1 years, 63.6% female) completed a 6-minute walk test as part of their routine clinical assessment, and then repeated the 6-minute walk test at mean ± SD 8 ± 1.2 days later, in the same clinical setting with the same rater. RESULTS: The intraclass correlation coefficient (95% confidence interval) was 0.86 (0.66-0.94); the SEM and SDD were 23.5 and 65.1 meters, respectively. CONCLUSION: These results provide evidence of good-excellent reproducibility of the 6-minute walk test with children and youth with JIA and support the use of the 6-minute walk test as a measure of submaximal exercise capacity in clinical practice and research.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | medium |
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".