Assessment of Intrasubject Reliability of Radiographic Craniocervical Posture of Asymptomatic Female Subjects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to measure the reproducibility of the craniocervical posture (intrasubject reliability) of asymptomatic female subjects. METHODS: Two radiographs of the craniocervical posture of 22 female subjects (mean ± SD: age, 28 ± 4.37 years; body mass index, 22.3 ± 3.24 kg/m(2)) in the sagittal view were taken 1 week apart and at the same time of day. Their posture was standardized in the self-balance position. Seven angles were measured in the digitalized radiographs and analyzed using the Alcimage software (Uberlândia, Minas Gerais, Brazil). Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), SEM, and 95% confidence intervals were analyzed. RESULTS: Good-to-excellent ICC (ICC, 0.90-0.98) and small SEM (SEM, 0.25-0.70) were found. CONCLUSION: The craniocervical posture of the subjects included in this study was reproducible (ie, intrasubject reliability) when measured a week apart using radiographs.
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".