Relation between the Pelvis and the Sagittal Profile in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis: the Influence of Curve Type
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous studies have shown a correlation between pelvic parameters and the lumbar lordosis in normal subjects and in scoliotic adults. This study investigates the relationship between pelvic and spinal geometries in the sagittal plane for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) patients having various curve types. The study group was composed of 129 AIS patients classified according to their curve type: King I, King II, King III or lumbar curve. The SpineView software (Surgiview, France) was used to compute five parameters on sagittal x-rays: thoracic kyphosis (TK), lumbar lordosis (LL), sacral slope (SS), pelvic tilt (PT) and pelvic incidence (PI). The TK was significantly lower for King I, II and III curves as compared to the lumbar curves. The LL tended to be higher for patients having a major lumbar scoliotic (King I and lumbar) curve, although not significantly. No significant change between the groups was observed for the SS, PT and PI. The PI was significantly correlated to the LL, SS and PT for all groups. The SS was strongly related to the LL in all cases. However, no relationship was found between the TK and the LL in any group. This study showed that the TK mostly depends on the thoracic scoliotic curve and therefore on the shape and orientation of the vertebrae, which explains that many King I, II and III patients are hypokyphotic. Conversely, the LL is mainly influenced by the pelvic configuration. Since the pelvic parameters are similar for all groups, these parameters are not likely to be important in the development of a specific type of scoliotic curve.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".