MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2076262836 · doi:10.1097/brs.0b013e318204b05a

Substantial Asymmetry in Paraspinal Muscle Cross-Sectional Area in Healthy Adults Questions Its Value as a Marker of Low Back Pain and Pathology

2011· article· en· W2076262836 on OpenAlexafffund
Riikka Niemeläinen, Marie‐Michèle Briand, Michele C. Battié

Bibliographic record

VenueSpine · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Air (Canada)University of Alberta
FundersNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin DiseasesNational Institutes of HealthCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsMedicineMultifidus muscleLow back painLumbarCross-sectional studyPopulationMagnetic resonance imagingBack musclesErector spinae musclesKappaPhysical therapyAnatomyRadiologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional population-based study of paraspinal muscle asymmetry. OBJECTIVE: To examine level- and side-to-side differences in paraspinal muscle areas on magnetic resonance images in a population-based sample of middle aged men without low back pain (LBP). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Level- and side-specific multifidus muscle atrophy and fat infiltration have been suggested as possible markers for localized spinal pathology and LBP, but prior studies have limited generalizability due to small sample sizes, young age of samples and measurement issues. METHODS: From a general population sample of 600 twin men, those reporting no LBP during the prior year, no previous spinal fractures, and no bed rest for at least 1 week in the last 12 months were included in the study. All subjects had T2-weighted axial images available for the three lowest lumbar levels. Both total and fat-free cross-sectional areas (CSAs) of the multifidus and erector spinae muscles at the mid-disc level were measured. Intrarater reliability ranged between 0.90 and 0.98 for area measurements and 0.86 and 0.92 for measurements of side-to-side differences. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and paired t tests. RESULTS: Subjects consisted of 126 men whose mean multifidus total CSA measurements varied between 7.3 and 11.1 cm and between 6.9 and 10.8 cm for right and left sides, respectively, depending on the level. The corresponding mean areas for erector spinae were 9.4 to 19.6 cm2 for right side and 10.4 to 19.7 cm2 for left side. The multifidus was larger on the right side than on the left side in 65% to 68% of subjects, depending on spinal level (P < 0.001). The mean asymmetry at the three lowest lumbar levels was 10% to 13.2% and was smallest at L4-L5. Multifidus side-to-side asymmetry ranged from 0.1% to 44.3%. For erector spinae, the left-side measurements tended to be larger, reaching statistical significance (P < 0.0001) for the two lowest levels. The mean side-to-side asymmetry increased caudally for erector spinae, from 8.2% to 18.8% and was significantly different between adjacent levels (P < 0.01). The amount of intramuscular fat significantly increased caudally for both muscles. CONCLUSION: Paraspinal muscle asymmetry greater than 10% was commonly found in men without a history of LBP. This suggests caution in using level- and side-specific paraspinal muscle asymmetry to identify subjects with LBP and spinal pathology.

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)0.000
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.946

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.321
Teacher spread0.287 · 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

Citations113
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpineSame topicSpine and Intervertebral Disc PathologyFrench-language works237,207