Functional outcome measures in young, steroid-naïve boys with Duchenne muscular dystrophy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to quantitate motor performance in 196 genetically confirmed steroid-naïve boys with Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD), to evaluate the test-retest reliability of measures of motor performance in young DMD boys, and to assess correlations among the different functional outcomes including timed tests. Boys aged 4-7 years were recruited in the FOR-DMD study, a comparative effectiveness study of different steroid regimens in DMD. Eligible boys had to be able to rise from the floor independently and to perform pulmonary function testing consistently. The boys were evaluated with standardized assessments at the screening and baseline visits at 32 sites in 5 countries (US, UK, Canada, Italy, Germany). Assessments included timed rise from floor, timed 10 m walk/run, six-minute walk distance, North Star Ambulatory Assessment (NSAA) and forced vital capacity (FVC). Mean age at baseline was 5.9 years (range 4.1-8.1 years). Test-retest reliability was high for functional assessments, regardless of time lag between assessments (up to 90 days) and for the majority of age groups. Correlations were strong among the functional measures and timed tests, less so with FVC. Physiotherapy measures are reliable in a young, steroid-naïve population and rise from floor velocity appears to be a sensitive measure of strength in this population.
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) | 0.000 | 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, 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".