ArticleDisability and rehabilitation2014
Walking activity of children with cerebral palsy and children developing typically: a comparison between the Netherlands and the United States.
Article in Disability and rehabilitation, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Variability of total step activity in children with cerebral palsy: influence of definition of a day on participant retention within the study.BMC research notes · 2016Article
- Personal and environmental factors to consider when aiming to improve participation in physical activity in children with Spina Bifida: a qualitative study.BMC neurology · 2015Article
- Functional level assessment of individuals with transtibial limb loss: Evaluation in the clinical setting versus objective community ambulatory activity.Journal of rehabilitation and assistive technologies engineeringArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo compare walking activity of children with and without cerebral palsy (CP) between the Netherlands and the United States.
methodsA cross-sectional analysis on walking activity data from an international retrospective comparison study including a convenience sample of 134 walking children aged 7-12 years with spastic CP, classified as Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS) level I (N = 64), II (N = 49) or III (N = 21), and 223 typically developing children (TDC) from the Netherlands and the United States. Walking activity was assessed during a one-week period using a StepWatch™ activity monitor. Outcomes were the daily number of strides, daily time being inactive and spent at low (0-15 strides/min), moderate (16-30 strides/min) and high stride rate (31-60 strides/min). Walking activity was compared between countries using multiple linear regression analyses.
resultsWalking activity of TDC was not significantly different between countries. Compared to their American counterparts, Dutch children in GMFCS level I and II showed less walking activity (p < 0.05), whereas Dutch children in GMFCS level III showed more walking activity (p < 0.05).
conclusionThe absence of differences in walking activity between Dutch and American TDC, and the presence of differences in walking activity between Dutch and American children with CP suggest that between-country differences affect walking activity differently in children with CP. IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATION: Physical activity of children with CP should be promoted in both the United States and the Netherlands. The between-country differences in walking activity illustrate that apart from the severity of the CP walking activity seems to be influenced by environmental aspects. In the promotion of physical activity, practitioners should pay attention to environmental barriers that families may experience for increasing physical activity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.