MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Development of the neurocentral junction as seen on magnetic resonance images

2002· article· en· W195163533 on OpenAlexaff
T. Rajwani, Rakesh Bhargava, R. Lambert, Marc Moreau, James Mahood, V.J. Raso, Hongqiang Jiang, Emily Huang, X Wang, Alexander J. Daniel, K. M. Bagnall

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in health technology and informatics · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicScoliosis diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta HospitalUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMagnetic resonance imagingScoliosisMedicineVertebraLumbarVertebral columnIdiopathic scoliosisSpinal columnAnatomyRadiologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The neurocentral junction (NCJ) is a cartilaginous growth plate in the vertebra that has been implicated as a potential cause of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) since the early 1900s. Studies to date have focused on the age of closure without characterizing normal NCJ development. Using MRI, the normal development of the NCJ image can be determined and the stages preceding the disappearance of the NCJ image can be characterized. 405 NCJs from 11 pediatric patients were examined using MRI and the various images were categorized. NCJ development encompassed five stages, with a specific pattern of absence of the NCJ image noted in each vertebra and in the vertebral column as a whole. The image of the NCJ first became absent in the cervical region (age 6), then in the lumbar region (age 12) and finally in the thoracic region (age 14). These patterns of development serve as a baseline to evaluate NCJ pathology in conditions such as adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.283 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in health technology and informaticsSame topicScoliosis diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207