Turkish validity and reliability of the level of sitting scale in children with cerebral palsy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Level of Sitting Scale (LSS) is a valid and reliable classification index that categorizes sitting ability. The aim of this study is to establish the Turkish validity and reliability of the LSS in children with cerebral palsy (CP). METHODS: In total, 165 children (75 girls and 90 boys) between the ages of 4 and 18 years who were diagnosed with CP were included in the study. All children were evaluated by two independent physiotherapists for the interrater reliability analysis of the LSS and were reevaluated 1 week later by the same physiotherapist for the intrarater reliability analysis. The Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS) was used for validity analysis. RESULTS: The intrarater reliability analyses of the LSS showed an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.999 (ICC 95% CI [0.999-1]),and the interrater reliability analyses showed an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.998 (ICC 95% CI [0.998-0.999]). A statistically significant, negative, and strong correlation was found between the GMFCS and the LSS (p < 0.001, r = -0.770). DISCUSSION: The Turkish version of the LSS in children with CP is a valid and reliable scale. The Turkish LSS can be used by researchersand clinicians in research and to determine the sitting level of children with CP.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".