MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2065586920 · doi:10.1186/1748-7161-8-s1-o21

Feasibility and three months preliminary results of an RCT on the effect of Schroth exercises in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS)

2013· article· en· W2065586920 on OpenAlexaff
Sanja Schreiber, Éric Parent, DM Hedden, EM Watkins, DL Hill, Marc Moreau, Sarah Southon, JK Mahood

Bibliographic record

VenueScoliosis · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicScoliosis diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsGlenrose Rehabilitation HospitalUniversity of Alberta HospitalAlberta Hospital EdmontonUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePhysical therapyRandomized controlled trialIdiopathic scoliosisScoliosisSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Methods Fifteen patients with AIS, aged 10-18, with curves 10 – 45 degrees, braced or not, were randomized into Schroth, or standard care, groups. The six-month Schroth intervention consists of weekly one-hour long group exercise sessions, combined with a daily 45-minute long home program, consisting of 3-4 exercises prescribed using an algorithm. Compliance was monitored with a logbook. SRS-22r, Spinal Appearance Questionnaire, Sorensen back endurance, and Self-efficacy and Global Rating of Change (GRC) outcomes were measured. The effect sizes of the Schroth exercise treatment on key outcomes were estimated using Cohen’s d (≥0.8=large, 0.5-0.8=moderate, 0.2-0.5=small). Cohen’s d is defined as the difference in change between the group means, Schroth – Standard care, observed from baseline to 3 months, divided by the pooled standard deviation at baseline. Results Of 122 eligible patients, fifteen (12.3%) were enrolled between April and August 2011. Recruitment was 3 per month. Exercise subjects attended 89±9% of the prescribed weekly exercise sessions, and completed 76±8% of the prescribed home exercises. Only one Standardcare subject dropped out due to relocation. For SRS-22r domains, Cohen’s d effect sizes favored standard care: -0.31 for Self-image, -0.72 for Function, and -0.38 for Pain. For SAQ domains, some effect sizes favored standard care: 0.50 for General, 0.46 for Curve, 1.36 for Prominence, 0.57 for Shoulders and 0.35 for Chest. Other SAQ effect sizes favored Schroth: -0.14 for Trunk Shift, -0.31 for waist. The Sorensen test’s effect size was -0.14, and Self-efficacy’s was 0.5, both favoring standard care. The mean difference between groups in GRC was 3.4±1.7 in favor of the Schroth group.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.119
Threshold uncertainty score0.880

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScoliosisSame topicScoliosis diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207