MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045631457 · doi:10.1097/brs.0b013e318190b914

Classification of Scoliosis Deformity Three-Dimensional Spinal Shape by Cluster Analysis

2009· article· en· W2045631457 on OpenAlexaff
Ian A. F. Stokes, Archana Sangole, Carl‐Éric Aubin

Bibliographic record

VenueSpine · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicScoliosis diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustinePolytechnique Montréal
FundersNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases
KeywordsScoliosisMedicineOrthodonticsCobb angleDeformityCurvatureLordosisKyphosisRachisRotation (mathematics)VertebraRadiographyApex (geometry)SurgeryAnatomyGeometryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY DESIGN: Cluster analysis of existing database of spinal shape of patients attending a scoliosis clinic. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether patients with scoliosis can be classified into distinct groups by 3-dimensional curve shape. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Subjective or semiquantitative methods can be used to classify curve types in scoliosis, with the goal of rationalizing surgical planning. There are very few reports of using objective methods such as cluster analysis to improve this process. METHODS.: One hundred ten patients who underwent radiography of the spine by a stereo technique, at a scoliosis clinic in the period between 1982 and 1990, were studied. Fifty-six were studied longitudinally (average 3.4 clinic visits each), providing 245 total observations. Selected patients had 2 scoliosis curves with apex between T4 and L3, and both Cobb angles >9 degrees by an automated measurement. The 3-dimensional spinal shape was reconstructed from stereoradiographs. Each curve was quantified by its Cobb angle, apex level, apex vertebra rotation, and rotation of the plane of maximum curvature (PMC) (8 variables). Cluster analysis classified each patient at each visit by these variables. RESULTS: When the analysis searched for 4 clusters, the largest cluster (148 of 245 observations) was the pattern having counterclockwise rotation of the PMC of both curves (typically, a right upper scoliosis curve with kyphosis and left lower scoliosis curve with lordosis). The other 3 clusters (48, 34, and 15 observations) were the other permutations of these variables. Substantial overlap of all the other variables between groups was observed. Of the 56 patients seen longitudinally, 25 were consistently grouped at all clinic visits. CONCLUSION: Spinal shape of patients in a clinic population with 2 scoliosis curves form distinct groups according to the 4 permutations of the signs of the rotations of the PMC in 2 curve regions. The pattern can change with repeated observation, often because a slight curvature in the sagittal plane can change because of postural variation and measurement errors. Overlap of the other curve-shape variables between groups suggests that these spinal deformity classifications alone should not determine treatment strategy.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.283 · 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

Citations49
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpineSame topicScoliosis diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207