MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086460407 · doi:10.1007/s00586-012-2245-8

The metabolic basis of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: 2011 report of the “metabolic” workgroup of the Fondation Yves Cotrel

2012· review· en· W2086460407 on OpenAlexaff
Emre Acaroğlu, Régis Bobe, Jocelyn Enouf, Ralph Marcucio, Florina Moldovan, Alain Moreau

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Spine Journal · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicScoliosis diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineScoliosisIdiopathic scoliosisOsteoporosisPhysiologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationBioinformaticsSurgeryEndocrinologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this review is to elucidate the metabolic processes involved in the pathogenesis of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) in light of research by the present authors as well as current literature. METHODS: Pathogenetic mechanisms involved in AIS were modeled as (a) a form of neuromuscular scoliosis (in conjunction with an adverse mechanical environment such as bipedality), in which hormonal and other chemical factors act as regulators of skeletal muscle tone and function; (b) as a consequence of an abnormality in growth of the spinal column (in conjunction with an adverse mechanical environment such as bipedality), in which hormones and other chemical factors act as regulators of growth; and (c) as a mechanical failure of one side of the vertebral column due to a defect in trabecular formation or mineralization (in conjunction with an adverse mechanical environment such as bipedality); in which hormonal and other chemical factors act as regulators of bone formation, mineralization and/or resorption. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Current evidence supporting these models individually or in combination is discussed.

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)0.004
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.973
Threshold uncertainty score0.886

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations21
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Spine JournalSame topicScoliosis diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207