ReviewResearch involvement and engagement2025
Gross motor functional classification for arthrogryposis multiplex congenita: protocol for co-development involving public with lived and professional experience.
Review in Research involvement and engagement, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChildren with arthrogryposis multiplex congenita (AMC), a group of over 400 conditions characterized by congenital joint contractures, present with a wide range of gross motor functioning and mobility due to the heterogeneity of underlying diagnoses and physical involvement. Existing classification systems for AMC focus primarily on etiology and anatomical distribution but do not describe differences in gross motor functioning. In contrast, condition-specific functional classification systems have improved communication, treatment planning, and research by stratifying individuals based on functional ability. To date, no such classification system exists for AMC. This study aims to co-develop and evaluate the Gross Motor Functional Classification for Arthrogryposis Multiplex Congenita (GMFC-AMC), a condition-specific tool to support clinical and research needs.
methodsThis multi-phase study involves stakeholders with lived and professional experience in AMC from multiple countries. Phase 1 includes the initial drafting of the GMFC-AMC by an expert panel. In Phase 2, nominal group techniques are used to refine the draft. Phase 3 employs Delphi surveys to achieve international consensus on relevance, clarity, and comprehensibility. In Phase 4, the GMFC-AMC is translated and culturally adapted into French and Spanish following a structured cross-cultural adaptation process. Finally, Phase 5 evaluates reliability and construct validity across three languages. Inter-rater and test-retest reliability will be examined using video ratings of children with AMC. Construct validity will be assessed through correlations with established measures, including the Gillette Functional Assessment Questionnaire and the Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory – Computer Adaptive Test. DISCUSSION: The GMFC-AMC will address a critical gap in functional classification for children and youth with AMC by providing a standardized language for describing gross motor functioning. By engaging international stakeholders throughout the development process and ensuring rigorous testing of its psychometric properties, the GMFC-AMC is expected to be a reliable, valid, and meaningful tool across diverse clinical and cultural contexts. This classification will facilitate clearer communication, improve care planning, and enable stratification for future longitudinal and interventional studies in AMC populations.
trial registrationClinical trial number not applicable.
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.