MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3157653167 · doi:10.1080/09638288.2021.1906332

Reliability and minimal detectable change of the <i>Challenge</i>, an advanced motor skills test for children with cerebral palsy, Danish version

2021· article· en· W3157653167 on OpenAlexaff
Kirsten Nordbye‐Nielsen, Thomas Maribo, F. Virginia Wright, Ole Rahbek, Bjarne Møller‐Madsen

Bibliographic record

VenueDisability and Rehabilitation · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCerebral palsyDanishReliability (semiconductor)Test (biology)Physical medicine and rehabilitationMotor skillPhysical therapyPsychologyMedicineMotor impairmentDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose To translate and cross-culturally adapt the Challenge, and investigate the reliability and minimal detectable change (MDC) of the Danish Challenge in children with cerebral palsy (CP).Materials and methods A Danish version of the Challenge was created through a standardized translation process. Four physiotherapists evaluated face validity. Independently ambulatory children with CP were tested. Live performance rating was conducted by assessors independently scoring the Challenge. Video-rating was undertaken for a subset of assessments. Same day assessment test–retest reliability was estimated. The Challenge’s Best Score Total was of primary interest.Results Forty-five children (5–18 years: mean 10 years 9 months; 19 girls) in Gross Motor Function Classification System levels I and II were tested. Inter-rater reliability was excellent for live assessments (n = 45) ICC = 0.998 (95% CI 0.998–0.999) and video assessments (n = 15) ICC = 0.991 (95% CI 0.963–0.997) and intra-rater reliability was excellent for live versus video-recorded assessments (n = 10) ICC = 0.977 (95% CI 0.895–0.994). Test–retest reliability (n = 22) was excellent with ICC = 0.991 (95% CI 0.979–0.996) and minimal detectable change (MDC90) of 4.7 points.Conclusions The Danish Challenge showed excellent reliability in this testing context when physiotherapists scored from live- or video-recorded assessments. The Challenge’s ability to detect 4.7 points change seems a clinically realistic target for progress. Clinical trial registration: This trial has been approved by the Data Protection Agency, Central Region Denmark, Ref nr.: 615216, Case nr.: 1-16-02-46-16. Registration date: 01-01-2016.Implications for rehabilitationThe Challenge remained reliable and maintained a promising minimal detectable change of less than five points after translation and cultural adaptation.The Danish version of the Challenge 20-item version can be used to measure advanced motor skill performance in children with cerebral palsy, GMFCS level I and GMFCS level II.Challenge live scoring is as reliable as the more time-consuming video-recorded scoring, meaning that physiotherapists can choose the method that fits best with their clinical context and preference.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDisability and RehabilitationSame topicCerebral Palsy and Movement DisordersFrench-language works237,207