Objectification of The Alberta Infant Motor Scale for Czech Republic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Name of student: Marianna Vavříková Leader of the master thesis: Mgr. Kateřina Svěcená, PhD. Topic of the master thesis: Objectification of The Alberta Infant Motor Scale for Czech Republic Background: In the Czech Republic there is not a lot of standardized assessments for children which are formed for the Czech population. It is possible to use assessments from other countries. But for well interpreting of results and for good evidence based practice therapists need to have Czech normative data. Aims: Aim of this study was to make pilot study for using Alberta Infant Motor Scale. And then identify whether Czech therapists need to make new Czech normative data or if it is possible to use the Canadian ones. Methods: Alberta Infant Motor Scale was used on 31 Czech children. Assessment was used in home setting with presence of mother. All of assessments were videotaped. Each video was analyzed and the child obtained score after home visit. All mothers were informed about the research and anonymity was kept. Results: In the gross motor development Czech population is retarded in comparison with the Canadian normative data. Except children in ages 0 - < 1 and 1 - < 2 months. For using Alberta Infant Motor Scale new Czech normative data are needed. Key words: Alberta Infant Motor Scale Standardized...
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 | 0.005 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.003 |
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".