Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,035

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

THE GROSS MOTOR FUNCTION MEASURE: A MEANS TO EVALUATE THE EFFECTS OF PHYSICAL THERAPY

Russell, Dianne J., Rosenbaum, Peter L., Cadman, David T., Gowland, Carolyn, Hardy, Susan, Jarvis, Sheila·1989·Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology

Abstract

SUMMARY: This paper reports the results of a study to validate a measure of gross motor function in detecting change in the motor function of disabled children. Physiotherapists used this instrument to assess 111 patients with cerebral palsy, 25 with head injury and 34 non‐disabled preschool children on two occasions, the second after an interval of four to six months. Parents and therapists independently rated the children's function within two weeks of each assessment, and a sample of paired assessments was videotaped for ‘blind’ evaluation by therapists. Correlations between scores for change on this measure and the judgments of change by parents, therapists and ‘blind’ evaluators supported the hypothesis that the instrument would be responsive to both negative and positive changes. RÉSUMÉ: Appréciation de la fonction motrice globale: validation de la fidélité d'un instrument de mesure L'article rapporte les résultats d'une étude de validation de mesure de la fonction motrice globale, en relevant les modifications de la fonction motrice chez des enfants infirmes. Des kinésithérapeutes ont utilisé cet instrument pour évaluer 111 I.M.C., 25 séquelles de traumatisme cranien, et 34 enfants non‐infirmes d'âge préscolaire, cela à deux occasions, la seconde distante de quatre à six mois de la première. Parents et rééducateurs apprécièrent indépendamment l'activité des enfants dans les deux semaines suivant chaque évaluation, et un échantillon d'évaluations appariées fut enregistré en vidéo pour étude ‘en aveugle’ par les rééducateurs. Les corrélations obervées entre les notes de changement à cette mesure, les appréciations de changement par les parents et les rééducateurs, les évaluations en aveugle, favorisent l'hypothèse de la sensibilité de l'instrument de mesure aux modifications négatives et positives. ZUSAMMENFASSUNG: Bewertung der grobmotorischen Funktion: Validisierung einer Methode Diese Arbeit berichtet über die Ergibnisse einer Untersuchung, die das Ziel hatte, einen Bewertungsmaßstab der grobmotorischen Funktion zu validisieren, um Veränderungen der Motorfunktion bei behinderten Kindern. Physiotherapeuten benutzten diese Methode, um 111 Patienten mit Cerebralparese, 25 mit Kopfverletzungen und 34 nicht behinderte Vorschulkinder an zwei Terminen, der zweite fand nach einem Interval von vier bis sechs Wochen statt, zu untersuchen. Eltern und Therapeuten beurteilten die Funktion der Kinder unabhängig innerhalb von zwei Wochen nach jeder Untersuchung. Aus beiden Untersuchungen wurden Beispiele für eine ‘blinde’ Beurteilung durch Therapeuten auf Video aufgenommen. Korrelationen zwischen den Scores für Veränderungen nach dieser Bewertungsmethode und die Beurteilung der Veränderungen durch die Eltern, Therapeuten und ‘blinden’ Gutachter stützen die Hypothese, daß die Methode sowohl negative als auch positive Veränderungen erfassen würde. RESUMEN: Medición de la función motora grosera: validación de la capacidad de respuesta de un instrumento evaluativo Esta publicación aporta los resultados de un estudio para validar la medición de la función motora grosera para detectar cambios en niños inválidos. Los fisioterapeutas usan ron este instrumento para evaluar 111 pacientes con parálisis cerebral, 25 con trauma craneal y 34 niños preescolares no inválidos, en dos ocasiones, la segunda tras un intervalo de cuatro a seis meses. Los padres y los terapeutas independientemente valoraron las funciones de los niños en un período de dos semanas después de cada evaluación. Una muestra de cada pareja de evaluación se grabó en video para ser evaluada de forma ‘ciego’ por los terapeutas. Las correlaciones entre los puntajes en los cambios notados en la medición y el juicio dado por los padres, los terapeutas y evaluadores ‘ciegos’, apoyaban la hipótesis de que el instrumento podia responder adecuadamente a cambios positivos o negativos.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1469-8749.1989.tb04003.x

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 1,035

Metadata

Authors
Russell, D. J., Rosenbaum, P. L., Cadman, D. T., Gowland, C., Hardy, S., & Jarvis, S.
Venue
Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1989-06
Volume
31
Issue
3
Pages
341-352
ISSN
  • 0012-1622 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8749
OpenAlex
W2068699246
Cited by
1,035
References
1
FWCI
4.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: THE GROSS MOTOR FUNCTION MEASURE: A MEANS TO EVALUATE THE EFFECTS OF PHYSICAL THERAPY. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1469-8749.1989.tb04003.x
The paper
Russell, D. J., Rosenbaum, P. L., Cadman, D. T., Gowland, C., Hardy, S., & Jarvis, S. (1989). THE GROSS MOTOR FUNCTION MEASURE: A MEANS TO EVALUATE THE EFFECTS OF PHYSICAL THERAPY. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8749.1989.tb04003.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.