MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1815681948 · doi:10.3109/03093640409167925

Correlation between quantity and quality of orthosis wear and treatment outcomes in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis

2004· article· en· W1815681948 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProsthetics and Orthotics International · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicScoliosis diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaGlenrose Rehabilitation HospitalCapital District Health Authority
FundersOrthopaedic Research Society
KeywordsBraceMedicineIdiopathic scoliosisPhysical therapyScoliosisQuality of life (healthcare)Surgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Orthotic treatment is the most commonly used non-surgical treatment method for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). This study determined whether treatment outcome correlates with how often and how well children with AIS wear their orthoses. Eighteen (18) subjects (3M, 15F) who were diagnosed with idiopathic scoliosis and had worn their orthoses from 6 months up to 1 year participated in this study. All subjects were prescribed Boston braces to be worn full time (23 hrs/day). Twelve (12) subjects who completed their brace treatment were included in the data analysis. Three (3) treatment outcomes were classified as improvement, no change and deterioration. The quality of the brace wear was assessed by how often the brace was worn with zero force, below 80%, between 80 to 120%, and above 120% of the load level prescribed in the clinic. The quantity of brace wear was determined by how many hours per day they wore their brace. Subjects who wear their braces tighter and for more hours per day seem to have better outcomes.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.449

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.077
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.277 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it