Adult scoliosis and the SPINECOR® dynamic brace: some early results on efficiency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Scoliosis offers little hope for rehabilitation in the adult population. Pain and viscerosomatic dysfunction are frequently encountered. Conventional medical care uses rigid bracing, medication and surgery for the most serious cases. The treatment of adult scoliosis with the SpineCor Dynamic Brace deserves more attention. This brace offers a variety of combinations to improve spinal alignment depending on the type, severity and rigidity of the curve. The main therapeutic goal of this brace is to reduce the strain on the neuromusculoskeletal system. The brace acts as a dynamic support against compressive loading on the vertebral joints while creating a corrective movement in the spine. Seventeen adult scoliosis patients aged between 21 and 69, whose curves had a Cobb angle 18 to 78 degrees, were fitted with a SpineCor Dynamic Brace in a Chiropractic practice in Montréal, Canada. 13 of them were actively wearing it from 10 to 70 hrs per week. Thirteen of the 8 have complete resolution of their symptoms while in brace, 3 of which had a Numerical Pain Scale (NPS) over 6/10, and 2 had never experienced any pain before or after the treatment. It is important to make note that 8 of the 13 patients were concomitantly receiving CBP Chiropractic care. These results suggest that the SpineCor Dynamic Brace is a potential, promising conservative method for the treatment of scoliosis in the adult population. In this study, utilization of this brace improved patient pain and sense of wellbeing.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".