More Than Just Adolescence: Differences in Fatigue Between Youth With Cerebral Palsy and Typically Developing Peers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To quantify differences in fatigue and disordered sleep between adolescents with cerebral palsy (CP) and their typically developing peers. A secondary aim was to investigate the association between fatigue and disordered sleep in adolescents with CP. METHODS: A convenience sample of 36 youth with CP aged 10-18 years was matched for age and sex with 36 typically developing peers. The Fatigue Impact and Severity Self-Assessment (FISSA), the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) fatigue profile, and the Sleep Disturbance Scale for Children (SDSC) were collected. RESULTS: Higher fatigue was reported in participants with CP than in their typically developing peers based on the FISSA total score (mean paired difference=19.06; 99% confidence interval [CI], 6.06-32.1), the FISSA impact subscale (mean paired difference=11.19; 99% CI, 3.96-18.4), and the FISSA Management and Activity Modification subscale (mean paired difference=7.86; 99% CI, 1.1-14.6). There were no differences between groups in the PROMIS fatigue profile (mean paired difference=1.63; 99% CI, -1.57-4.83) or the SDSC total score (mean paired difference=2.71; 99% CI, -2.93-8.35). CONCLUSION: Youth with CP experienced significantly more fatigue than their peers as assessed by a comprehensive measure that considered both general and diagnosis-specific concerns. Sleep did not differ between youth with CP and their typically developing peers. These findings underscore the need to consider the clinical management of fatigue across the lifespan of individuals with CP to prevent the associated deterioration of functional abilities.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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, 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".