Lombo-sacral joint efforts during gait: comparison between healthy and scoliotic subjects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The internal efforts in the human body in motion could provide valuable information for the evaluation and follow-up of subjects with musculo-skeletal pathologies, such as scoliosis, but are still difficult to accurately measure. In this context, the objective of this study is to compare the lombo-sacral (L5-S1) joint efforts during gait (i.e.: mediolateral forces, mediolateral torques, and anteroposterior torques) between typically developed adolescents (TDA) and adolescents with left lumbar or thoracolumbar idiopathic scoliosis (AIS), categorized by their Cobb angle (CA). MATERIAL AND METHODS: 12 TDA, 10 AIS with CA < 20°, 13 AIS with CA between 20° and 40° as well as 16 AIS in preoperative condition performed gait at 4 km/h on instrumented treadmill. Among the latter group, 8 AIS were evaluated after surgical intervention (participants with at least a diminution of 30° of their CA). The acquisition system measured the human body joint motion via optokinetic sensors, and the ground reaction forces via a treadmill fitted with force sensors. The L5-S1 intervertebral efforts were calculated using a tridimensional inverse dynamical model of the human body. RESULTS: The mediolateral forces were significantly higher for AIS with CA between 20° and 40° and for AIS in pre-operative condition compared to TDA values. But neither mediolateral nor anteroposterior torque was significantly different between groups. After surgical intervention the maximal anteroposterior torque was significantly lower compared to pre-surgical value. CONCLUSION: The participants with severe idiopathic scoliosis present higher L5-S1 mediolateral forces than TDA, which could lead to a supplementary asymmetric vertebra growth modulation and the progression of the scoliotic deformities in the framework of the Hueter-Volkman principle. Further research should include the tridimensional reconstruction of the spine in order to observe differences between categories of AIS patients in terms of dynamical behaviors along the spine.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".