Spinal Cord Monitoring in Patients With Spinal Deformity and Neural Axis Abnormalities
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Brief Study Design. A retrospective review of spinal cord monitoring (SCM) results of patients with neural axis abnormalities (NAA) as compared with a control group of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) patients. Objective. To analyze SCM on a group of patients who had a NAA undergoing spinal deformity surgery. Summary of Background Data. To our knowledge, only 1 report in the literature has analyzed the accuracy and reliability of SCM in patients with NAA. Methods. Over a 10-year period, 41 patients with NAA had SCM while undergoing surgery for spinal deformity. These patients were retrospectively compared with a group of 136 AIS patients. Results. The average ages were similar (14.4 vs. 14.6 years), but there were more males (48.8% vs. 19.1%) and greater preoperative curve magnitude in the NAA group (65.9° vs. 59.8°) (P < 0.05). Good baseline values were achieved less often in the NAA group for somatosensory-evoked potentials (SSEP) (85.4% vs. 98.5%) and motor-evoked potentials (MEP) (82.6% vs. 100%) (P < 0.05). Significant deviations from baseline values were seen more often in the NAA group for SSEP (8.6% vs. 1.5%) and MEP (5.3% vs. 2.5%). There were no false negatives in either group. Conclusions. SCM in patients who have NAA can be more difficult to obtain than in AIS but results in few false positives and does not miss neurologic injury. A retrospective comparison was performed of 41 patients with neural axis abnormalities (NAA) and 136 patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) to analyze the efficacy of spinal cord monitoring (SCM) in this population. For NAA patients, good baselines were obtained in 85% of SSEPs and 83% of MEPs. Significant SCM deviations were observed in both groups with few false positives and no false negatives.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it