ArticleDevelopmental medicine and child neurology2026
Psychometric properties of functional mobility outcome measures in children with arthrogryposis multiplex congenita.
Article in Developmental medicine and child neurology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Gross motor functional classification for arthrogryposis multiplex congenita: protocol for co-development involving public with lived and professional experience.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Review
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.
Funding
Abstract
aimTo establish the construct validity, agreement, and minimal important difference (MID) of widely used mobility measures in arthrogryposis multiplex congenita (AMC).
methodParticipants (n = 248, 126 males, mean age 10 years 10 months, standard deviation 3 years 11 months) with AMC were assessed using the Functional Mobility Scale (FMS), Gillette Functional Assessment Questionnaire (FAQ), Functional Independence Measure for Children (WeeFIM), and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). Convergent and discriminant validity were evaluated using Spearman's rank correlations, while known-groups validity was examined using analysis of variance. Cohen's kappa and distribution-based methods were used to estimate agreement and MIDs respectively.
resultsRobust convergent (ρ = 0.66-0.82, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.54-0.86) and discriminant (ρ = 0.06-0.31, 95% CI -0.11 to 0.43) validity were found for all four mobility measures. Known-groups validity was supported by significant mean differences across AMC subtypes (amyoplasia, distal arthrogryposis, central nervous system/syndromic; p < 0.001). The measures also showed weak to good agreement in classifying mobility. A difference of one and two levels on the FMS and FAQ respectively, was found to be minimally important. For the PROMIS and WeeFIM, estimated MID values were 3.19 to 4.34 and 14.24 respectively.
interpretationThe robust construct validity, agreement, and MIDs provide clinicians and researchers with evidence-based benchmarks for assessing mobility in children with AMC.
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.