We have located links that may give you full text access.
Reliability of the gross motor function classification system and the manual ability classification system in children with cerebral palsy in Tanzania.
Developmental Neurorehabilitation 2017 July 11
OBJECTIVES: Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS) and Manual Ability Classification System (MACS) are broadly studied in high-income countries, but data concerning their functioning are lacking in developing countries. Therefore, we analyzed their reliability and sensitivity to change in children with cerebral palsy in Tanzania.
METHODS: GMFCS and MACS are two ordinal grading systems used to assess motor functions while observing children's performances. Forty-nine children were classified by two independent physiotherapy students at baseline, after one month and after one year. Reliability and sensitivity to change were analyzed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), effect size (ES), standard response mean (SRM), standard error of measurement (SEM), and minimal detectable change (MDC).
RESULTS: Inter- (ICC = 0.97/0.95 for GMFCS/MACS) and intra-rater reliability (ICC = 0.98/0.96 GMFCS/MACS) were excellent. Sensitivity to change was small (ES = -0.14/0.11, SRM = -0.24;/0.24 GMFCS/MACS). SEM was 0.2 points, resulting in MDC = 0.5/0.7 for GMFCS/MACS, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: GMFCS and MACS demonstrated excellent reliability, but not sensitivity to change.
METHODS: GMFCS and MACS are two ordinal grading systems used to assess motor functions while observing children's performances. Forty-nine children were classified by two independent physiotherapy students at baseline, after one month and after one year. Reliability and sensitivity to change were analyzed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), effect size (ES), standard response mean (SRM), standard error of measurement (SEM), and minimal detectable change (MDC).
RESULTS: Inter- (ICC = 0.97/0.95 for GMFCS/MACS) and intra-rater reliability (ICC = 0.98/0.96 GMFCS/MACS) were excellent. Sensitivity to change was small (ES = -0.14/0.11, SRM = -0.24;/0.24 GMFCS/MACS). SEM was 0.2 points, resulting in MDC = 0.5/0.7 for GMFCS/MACS, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: GMFCS and MACS demonstrated excellent reliability, but not sensitivity to change.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app