Concurrent and Convergent Validity of the Child Focused Injury Risk Screening Tool (ChildFirst) for 8-12-Year-Old Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Child Focused Injury Risk Screening Tool (ChildFIRST) aims to measure movement competence and lower-limb-injury risk in 8–12-year-old children. Although the ChildFIRST has face and content validity evidence, stronger validity evidence is warranted. We tested the concurrent validity of the ChildFIRST using motion analysis, and the convergent validity of the ChildFIRST using the modified Star Excursion Balance Test (mSEBT) and the Test of Gross Motor Development 3 (TGMD-3). We computed correlation coefficients (0.05 alpha level). We evaluated 17 participants. We observed positive correlation values between 18 ChildFIRST evaluation criteria and peak joint angles in the frontal and sagittal planes. One movement skill (i.e. leaping) presented a negative correlation value. We observed positive correlation values between the ChildFIRST and TGMD-3 and between the ChildFIRST and the mSEBT. Nine out of ten movement skills in the ChildFIRST are valid to assess movement competence and identify risk factors associated with lower-limb musculoskeletal injuries.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".