A Variability Study of Computerized Sagittal Sacral Radiologic Measures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: A radiographic study was conducted to investigate the accuracy of computer-assisted measurement of sacral morphology in a population with developmental L5-S1 spondylolisthesis. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the inter- and intraobserver variability of computer measurements of sacral morphology. SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND DATA: Recent studies have shown differences in sacral morphology among patients with spondylolisthesis. The sacral table angle (STA) is a fundamental sacral anatomic parameter that is specific and constant to each individual, while the S1 superior and S2 inferior angles are defined as anatomic measures specific to S1 and S2. Sacral kyphosis measured by Ferguson or Cobb method has also been used to evaluate the sagittal shape of the sacrum. Currently, computerized measures are gaining popularity for the study of sagittal balance, but their reliability especially in sacral morphology has never been properly evaluated. METHODS: The standing lateral radiographs of 30 adolescents were randomly selected from the radiographic database of our institution: 10 radiographs of asymptomatic individuals, 10 of subjects with low grade L5-S1 spondylolisthesis and 10 with high grade L5-S1 developmental spondylolisthesis. Three surgeons measured sacral morphologic variables on the 30 radiographs at 2 occasions, with a 15 days interval between the 2 sessions, using a computer assisted technique. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: The ICC values measured within observers varied between 0.951 to 0.995, whereas the ICC measured between observers varied between 0.957 to 0.995. There was a slight decrease of the ICC measured in the high grade L5-S1 spondylolisthesis group compared to the normal subjects. However, the difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: These results confirm the reliability and repeatability of computer-assisted angular measurement of sacral morphology in subjects with L5-S1 spondylolisthesis, even in the presence of lumbosacral junction dysplasia. The use of computerized measurements can be recommended for the evaluation of the sagittal sacral anatomy in future clinical and research studies.
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 | 0.007 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".