MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385664383 · doi:10.1186/s40900-023-00479-6

Stakeholder engagement in the development of an upper extremity outcome measure for children with rare musculoskeletal conditions

2023· article· en· W4385664383 on OpenAlexafffund
Caroline Elfassy, Lisa V. Wagner, Johanne Higgins, Kathleen Montpetit, Laurie Snider, Noémi Dahan‐Oliel

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Involvement and Engagement · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurogenetic and Muscular Disorders Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMcGill UniversityShriners Hospitals for Children - Canada
FundersRéseau Provincial de Recherche en Adaptation-RéadaptationShriners Hospitals for Children
KeywordsMedicineArthrogryposis multiplex congenitaNominal group techniquePhysical therapyPatient-reported outcomePopulationArthrogryposisQuality of life (healthcare)NursingSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Upper extremity (UE) involvement is prevalent in 73% of individuals with arthrogryposis multiplex congenita (AMC), yet no AMC-specific outcome measure exists. When developing a measure specific to a population with a rare musculoskeletal condition, clinicians' and patients' perspectives and involvement is a crucial and necessary step. This study sought to determine the most clinically useful items for an outcome measure of UE function for children with AMC as defined by caregivers and clinicians. METHODS: To ensure the perspectives and needs of caregivers of children with AMC and clinicians were considered in the development of the UE measure for AMC, a Nominal Group technique (NGT) with caregivers of children with AMC (phase 1) followed by a three-round survey with clinicians (phase 2) were carried out. RESULTS: Phase 1: Eleven individuals participated in the nominal group technique and identified 32 items. The most important items were Picking up an object (n = 11), Eating (n = 10), Reaching mouth (n = 10), Getting out of bed (n = 10). Phase 2: Invitations to participate to an online survey was sent to 47 experts in the field of AMC, 20 participants completed round 1, 15 completed round 2 and 13 completed round 3. Throughout the survey, participants were asked about movement required to screen the UE, essential domains to be included in the measure, establishing a scoring guide and identifying tasks associated with joint motion and position. CONCLUSION: A preliminary version of an UE AMC-specific outcome measure was developed with the help of caregivers' perspectives and expert opinions.

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)0.009
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 score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.481

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.286
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.137 · 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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Involvement and EngagementSame topicNeurogenetic and Muscular Disorders ResearchFrench-language works237,207