MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974475920 · doi:10.1186/1748-7161-5-s1-o33

Is standing balance control in adolescent idiopathic scoliotic girls associated to the horizontal body and trunk center of mass offset?

2010· article· en· W1974475920 on OpenAlexaff
Paul Allard, Georges Dalleau, Mohsen Damavandi, Charles H. Rivard

Bibliographic record

VenueScoliosis · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicScoliosis diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrunkMedicineDeformityScoliosisBalance (ability)Physical medicine and rehabilitationIdiopathic scoliosisCenter of pressure (fluid mechanics)Body segmentAnatomyOrthodonticsSurgeryBiologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Though adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is characterized by a lateral deviation of the spine with resulting geometric changes in the trunk and rib cage standing imbalance was reported. The type and location of the spinal deformity was shown to perturb balance control while the interaction between standing posture and balance in AIS suggest a dysfunction in the postural regulation system of scoliotic subjects. Postural responses appear to be dependent on body somatotypes and in particular that ectomorphic girls have a tendency to lean further back favoring a hypokyphotic trunk attitude and increasing the risk of spinal deformity progression. These observations on spinal deformity and body shape alterations that modify trunk COM position imply a change in the body center of mass position as well that could perturb standing balance. In scoliotic girls, postural imbalance was attributed to a sensory rearrangement of the motor system on the representation of the body in space. The objectives of this study were to test if the antero-posterior (AP), medio-lateral (ML) and resultant body-head and trunk center of mass (COM) horizontal offsets were similar in able-bodied and scoliotic girls and if these offsets were related to the center of pressure displacements.

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 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)0.001
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.684

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScoliosisSame topicScoliosis diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207