ArticleBMJ paediatrics open2026
Chinese expert consensus on the diagnostic definition of cerebral palsy.
Article in BMJ paediatrics open, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo standardise the diagnostic criteria for cerebral palsy (CP) in China by resolving key ambiguities surrounding the timing of brain injury, the definition of non-progressiveness and the role of genetic aetiologies.
methodsA modified Delphi process was conducted in 2025 by the Rehabilitation Subspecialty Group of the Chinese Pediatric Society. Thirty-three national experts in paediatric neurology, rehabilitation, genetics and epidemiology participated. The process included literature review, iterative statement drafting and two rounds of anonymous voting. Consensus was defined as ≥80% agreement.
resultsThree diagnostic pillars were established: (1) a non-progressive injury to the developing brain occurring from the embryonic period through age 3; (2) non-progressive nature is defined by the absence of regression of previously acquired motor milestones through age 5 and (3) genetic factors are integral to CP pathogenesis and may justify classification as 'CP due to genetic variation' when specific criteria are met. Cerebral MRI, General Movements Assessment and Hammersmith Infant Neurological Examination were highlighted as key tools for early diagnosis.
conclusionsThis updated expert consensus aligns national CP diagnostic criteria with current advances in neurodevelopmental and genomic science. It supports early, accurate diagnosis, guides genetic evaluation and promotes harmonised clinical practice across Chinese healthcare systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.