MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Limb distribution, motor impairment, and functional classification of cerebral palsy

2004· article· en· W4245602911 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Jan Willem Gorter, Peter Rosenbaum, Steven Hanna, Robert J. Palisano, Doreen J. Bartlett, Dianne J Russell, Stephen D. Walter, Parminder Raina, Barbara Galuppi, Ellen Wood

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Medicine & Child Neurology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityWestern UniversityMcMaster University
FundersMedical Research CouncilNational Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthMedical Research Council CanadaZonMwWorld Health Organization
KeywordsGross Motor Function Classification SystemCerebral palsyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMotor impairmentMedicinePhysical therapyCohort studyCohortPsychologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explored the relationships between the Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS), limb distribution, and type of motor impairment. Data used were collected in the Ontario Motor Growth study, a longitudinal cohort study with a population‐based sample of children with cerebral palsy (CP) in Canada ( n =657; age 1 to 13 years at study onset). The majority (87.8%) of children with hemiplegia were classified as level I. Children with a bilateral syndrome were represented in all GMFCS levels, with most in levels III, IV, and V. Classifications by GMFCS and‘limb distribution’or by GMFCS and‘type of motor impairment’were statistically significantly associated (Pearson's χ 2 p < 0.001), though the correlation for limb distribution (two categories) by GMFCS was low (tau‐b=0.43). An analysis of function (GMFCS) by impairment (limb distribution) indicates that the latter clinical characteristic does not add prognostic value over GMFCS. Although classification of CP by impairment level is useful for clinical and epidemiological purposes, the value of these subgroups as an indicator of mobility is limited in comparison with the classification of severity with the GMFCS.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.077
Threshold uncertainty score0.640

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations175
Published2004
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmental Medicine & Child NeurologySame topicCerebral Palsy and Movement DisordersFrench-language works237,207