MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047839362 · doi:10.1097/brs.0b013e318193a23d

Assessment of Spinal Flexibility in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis

2009· article· en· W2047839362 on OpenAlexaff
Marie-Eve Lamarre, Stefan Parent, Hubert Labelle, Carl‐Éric Aubin, Julie Joncas, Anne Cabral, Yvan Petit

Bibliographic record

VenueSpine · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicScoliosis diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalÉcole de Technologie SupérieurePolytechnique MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineScoliosisFlexibility (engineering)OrthodonticsSuspension (topology)BendingReduction (mathematics)Idiopathic scoliosisRachisRadiological weaponReproducibilityVertebraSurgeryStructural engineeringMathematicsGeometryStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective evaluation of a new suspension test to determine curve flexibility in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) in comparison with erect side-bending. OBJECTIVE: To verify whether the suspension is a better method than side-bending to estimate curve reducibility and to assess spine flexibility. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Spinal flexibility is a decisive biomechanical parameter for the planning of AIS surgery. Side-bending is often referred as the gold standard, but it has a low reproducibility and there is no agreement amongst surgeons about the most advantageous method to use. Even more, every technique evaluates reducibility instead of flexibility since the forces involved in the change in shape of the spine are not considered. METHODS: Eighteen patients scheduled for AIS surgery were studied. Preoperative radiological evaluation consisted of 4 radiographs: standing posteroanterior, left and right erect side-bending, and suspension. The side-bending and the suspension tests were compared on the basis of the apical vertebrae derotation and the scoliosis curve reduction. Frontal and axial flexibility indices, expressed as the ratio between the moment induced by the body weight and the reduction, were calculated from the suspension data. RESULTS: The average scoliosis curve reduction and apical vertebra derotation were 21 degrees (37%) and 3 degrees (12%), respectively for erect side-bending and 26 degrees (39%) and 7 degrees (28%), respectively for suspension. The erect side-bending test generated a larger curve reduction (P = 0.05) when considering the moderate curves only and the suspension test (P = 0.02) when considering the severe curves. The suspension test produced a larger axial derotation (P = 0.007) when considering all the curves. The average traction force during suspension was 306 N (187 N-377 N). The average estimation for the frontal flexibility index was 1.64 degrees/Nm (0.84-2.82) and 0.51 degrees/Nm (0.01-1.39) for the axial flexibility index. CONCLUSION: Results of this study demonstrate the feasibility to really evaluate the spine flexibility with the suspension test. The estimated flexibility values are realistic and similar to those reported in vitro. Suspension should be used in the future for spine flexibility assessment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.465

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.336 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations67
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpineSame topicScoliosis diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207