The effects of a 6-month Schroth intervention for Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis (AIS): preliminary analysis of an ongoing randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Methods A total of 31 patients with AIS, aged 10-18, with curves from 10°-45°, wearing a brace or not, participated. Sixteen were randomized to Schroth with standard care, and 15 to standard care alone (monitoring or bracing) for six months. The Schroth intervention consisted of five individual visits to learn the exercises, followed by weekly supervised group sessions of one hour each, with daily home exercises prescribed using an algorithm [2] (45 minutes per day). Compliance was monitored with a logbook, and outcomes were recorded at baseline and six months. Effect sizes were estimated using Cohen’s d, which corresponds to the mean difference between the groups in the change observed from baseline to six months (Schroth – standard care), divided by the pooled standard deviation at baseline (Cohen’s d ≥0.8=large, 0.5-0.8=moderate, 0.2-0.5=small[3]). Results Two controls and one Schroth group participant dropped out. Mean age was 14.4±2.1yrs for Schroth and 13.7 ±1.7yrs for controls; mean Cobb angles were 32.6±7.9o and 28.8±10.0o, respectively. Schroth participants with complete follow-up attended 87±8% of the prescribed weekly exercise sessions and completed 86±5% of the prescribed home exercises. Intention-to-treat analysis lowered compliance to 83±19% and 81±17% for weekly sessions and home program, respectively. Effect sizes at six months for the SRS-22r were smaller than expected, but favored the Schroth group with Cohen’s d: pain=0.09, selfimage=0.09, function=0.00 and total=0.21. The effect sizes for self-efficacy (0.18) and for the Biering-Sorensen test (0.28) also favored Schroth. The perceived mean global rating of change in the Schroth group was 3.8±2.2, corresponding to moderate improvement, and -0.3±1.7 in the standard care group, corresponding to a small amount of deterioration.
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 | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".