MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077434741 · doi:10.1067/mmt.2003.15

Repeatability over time of posture, radiograph positioning, and radiograph line drawing: An analysis of six control groups

2003· article· en· W2077434741 on OpenAlexaff
Deed E. Harrison, Donald D. Harrison, Christopher J. Colloca, Joseph W. Betz, Tadeusz J. Janik, Burt Holland

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicScoliosis diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadiographyMedicineChiropracticRepeatabilityReliability (semiconductor)Displacement (psychology)OrthodonticsNuclear medicineRadiologyPsychologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: There is debate concerning the repeatability of posture over time, radiograph positioning repeatability, and radiograph line drawing reliability. These ideas seem to negate the use of before-and-after spinal radiographic imaging to detect and correct vertebral subluxations. OBJECTIVE: To review the results of control groups in 6 clinical control trials with before-and-after radiographic measurements taken days, weeks, months, or years apart to accept or reject the hypothesis that radiographic analysis procedures are not repeatable, reliable, or reproducible. DATA SOURCES: Six published control groups from original data. Other data were obtained from searches on MEDLINE, CHIROLARS, MANTIS, and CINAHL on radiographic reliability, posture, and positioning. RESULTS: Comparison of initial and follow-up radiographic data for 6 control groups indicate that measured angles and distances between initial and follow-up radiograph measurements on lateral and anterior to posterior radiographs are not significantly different when utilizing Chiropractic Biophysics radiographic procedures. In 48 out of 50 measurements, the differences between initial and follow-up radiographs are less than 1.5 degrees and 2 mm. These measurements indicate that posture is repeatable, radiographic positioning is repeatable, and radiographic line drawing analysis for spinal displacement is highly reliable. The scientific literature on these topics also indicates the repeatability of posture, radiographic positioning, and radiographic line drawing. CONCLUSIONS: Posture, radiographic positioning, and radiographic line drawing are all very reliable/repeatable. When Chiropractic Biophysics standardized procedures are used, any pre-to-post alignment changes in treatment groups are a result of the treatment procedures applied. These results contradict common claims made by several researchers and clinicians in the indexed literature. Chiropractic radiologic education and publications should reflect the recent literature, provide more support for posture analysis, radiographic positioning, radiographic line drawing analyses, and applications of posture and radiographic procedures for measuring spinal displacement on plain radiographs.

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 score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.429

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.138
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations83
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Manipulative and Physiological TherapeuticsSame topicScoliosis diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207