MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2024983661 · doi:10.1097/brs.0b013e3181bf280e

A Decision Tree Can Increase Accuracy When Assessing Curve Types According to Lenke Classification of Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis

2010· article· en· W2024983661 on OpenAlexafffund
Philippe Phan, Neila Mezghani, Marie‐Lyne Nault, Carl‐Éric Aubin, Stefan Parent, Jacques A. de Guise, Hubert Labelle

Bibliographic record

VenueSpine · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicScoliosis diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineDecision treeIdiopathic scoliosisReliability (semiconductor)Artificial intelligenceScoliosisCorrelationDecision tree learningChartWilcoxon signed-rank testRanking (information retrieval)Pattern recognition (psychology)StatisticsAlgorithmMathematicsMann–Whitney U testComputer scienceSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY DESIGN: The assignment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) curves into curve types (1-6), as described by Lenke et al, was evaluated by 12 independent observers using the original description versus a decisional tree algorithm. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a decision tree algorithm can improve classification accuracy using the Lenke classification for AIS. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Curve type classification in AIS relies on several parameters to consider, and its relative complexity has lead to conflicting studies that reported fair-to-excellent interobserver reliability. King's classification reliability was shown to be improved using a rule-based automated algorithm. No similar algorithm for Lenke's classification currently exists. METHODS: A clinical diagram derived from a decision tree was developed to help clinicians classify AIS curves. Twelve clinicians and research assistants were asked to classify AIS curves using 2 methods: the original Lenke chart alone and the decision tree diagram in addition to the Lenke Chart. Wilcoxon ranking tests were used to evaluate any difference in classification accuracy and speed for both methods. Mann-Whitney tests were used to compare experts' and nonexperts' results. Pearson correlation was calculated to evaluate the relationship between accuracy and time taken to classify. RESULTS.: Use of the decision tree for curve type determination improved classification accuracy from 77.2% to 92.9% (P = 0.005) without requiring more time to classify. This improvement was statistically significant (P < 0.05). A statistically significant correlation between accuracy and time spent classifying when the decision tree is used was also observed (R = 0.62, P = 0.032). CONCLUSION: Transfer of a computer algorithm, a decision tree, to a clinical diagram improved both accuracy ofAIS classification. Algorithmic diagrams could prove beneficial to increase classification reliability due to their systematic approach.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.068
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.068
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.305 · 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

Citations14
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpineSame topicScoliosis diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207