A Delphi Study to establish consensus on an Australasian minimum dataset for paediatric stroke rehabilitation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Background This study aimed to develop a consensus-derived minimum dataset (MDS) for childhood stroke to establish an agreed set of tools to measure key functional outcomes identified as important by childhood stroke survivors and their families. Methods A steering group comprising clinicians of varying rehabilitation disciplines, as well as families with lived experience, was established to oversee the modified Delphi process. Consultations with parents and young people with lived experience determined key functional outcomes of importance to families throughout rehabilitation. Based on this information, a prospective survey-based Delphi process was conducted, to reach consensus for an Australasian MDS for paediatric stroke rehabilitation. An advisory group comprising specialist rehabilitation clinicians from nine rehabilitation services across Australia and New Zealand responded to three surveys, which aimed to reach consensus on the key functional outcomes that are important to measure, the tools to measure these outcomes, and the timepoints for measurement. After each survey, the steering group collated and analysed the data, and confirmed the content of subsequent surveys. Results Seventy-three participants from 12 rehabilitation disciplines participated. After Survey 3, consensus was reached on the measures for 14 (64%) of 22 functional outcomes in the pre-school age band, and 20 (50%) of the 40 potential measures in the school-aged band. The Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) was identified as a particularly valuable tool, achieving broad consensus due to its clinical utility, flexibility, and alignment with outcomes of importance to families and clinicians. Agreement on tools to measure other functional outcomes, particularly body function outcomes, reached lower levels of consensus. Conclusions The agreement on the best measurement tools to be included in a MDS represents an important advancement in paediatric stroke rehabilitation research. The current findings provide a foundation for transformative improvements in future research, and in the care of children recovering from stroke.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.395 | 0.299 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.014 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".