MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001678978 · doi:10.1080/10255840008907998

Reconstruction of Laser-scanned 3D Torso Topography and Stereoradiographical Spine and Rib-cage Geometry in Scoliosis

2001· article· en· W2001678978 on OpenAlexaff
Philippe Poncet, Janet L. Ronsky, Jean Dansereau, George Clynch, James A. Harder, Richard D. Dewar, Hubert Labelle, PEI-HUA GU, Ronald F. Zernicke

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Methods in Biomechanics & Biomedical Engineering · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicScoliosis diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalPolytechnique MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTorsoScoliosisLaserRib cageTrunkLaser scanningMedicineAnatomyOpticsPhysicsSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Assessments of scoliosis are routinely done by means of clinical examination and full spinal x-rays. Multiple exposure to ionization radiation, however, can be hazardous to the child and is costly. Here, we explain the use of a noninvasive imaging technique, based on laser optical scanning, for quantifying the three-dimensional (3D) trunk surface topography that can be used to estimate parameters of 3D deformity of the spine. The laser optical scanning system consisted of four BIRIS laser cameras mounted on a ring moving along a vertical axis, producing a topographical mapping of the entire torso. In conjunction with the laser scans, an accurate 3D reconstruction of the spine and rib cage were developed from the digitized x-ray images. Results from 14 scoliotic patients are reported. The digitized surfaces provided the foundation data to start studying concordance of trunk surface asymmetry and spinal shape in idiopathic scoliosis.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.306
Teacher spread0.291 · 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

Citations43
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer Methods in Biomechanics & Biomedical EngineeringSame topicScoliosis diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207