Assessment of foot alignment and function for ambulatory children with cerebral palsy: Results of a modified Delphi technique consensus study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to establish consensus for the assessment of foot alignment and function in ambulatory children with cerebral palsy, using expert surgeon's opinion through a modified Delphi technique. Methods: The panel used a five-level Likert-type scale to record agreement or disagreement with 33 statements regarding the assessment of foot alignment and function. Consensus was defined as at least 80% of responses being in the highest or lowest of two of the five Likert-type ratings. General agreement was defined as 60%-79% falling into the highest or lowest two ratings. There was no agreement if neither threshold was reached. Results: Consensus was achieved for 25 (76%) statements, general agreement for 4 (12%) statements, and lack of consensus for 4 (12%) of the statements. There was consensus that the functional anatomy of the foot is best understood by dividing the foot into three segments and two columns. Consensus was achieved concerning descriptors of foot segmental alignment for both static and dynamic assessment. There was consensus that radiographs of the foot should be weight-bearing. There was general agreement that foot deformity in children with cerebral palsy can be classified into three levels based on soft tissue imbalance and skeletal malalignment. Conclusion: The practices identified in this study can be used to establish best care guidelines, and the format used will be a template for future Delphi technique studies on clinical decision-making for the management of specific foot segmental malalignment patterns commonly seen in children with cerebral palsy. Level of Evidence: V.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it