MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122454338 · doi:10.1109/isbi.2010.5490322

Prediction of scoliosis curve type based on the analysis of trunk surface topography

2010· article· en· W2122454338 on OpenAlexaff
Lama Séoud, Mathias M. Adankon, Hubert Labelle, J. Dansereau, Farida Chériet

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicScoliosis diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie SupérieurePolytechnique MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScoliosisTrunkComputer scienceRotation (mathematics)DeformityArtificial intelligenceIdiopathic scoliosisSurface (topology)MathematicsMedicineGeometrySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Scoliosis treatment strategy is generally chosen according to the severity and type of the spinal curve. Currently, the curve type is determined from X-rays whose acquisition can be harmful for the patient. We propose in this paper a system that can predict the scoliosis curve type based on the analysis of the surface of the trunk. The latter is acquired and reconstructed in 3D using a non invasive multi-head digitizing system. The deformity is described by the back surface rotation, measured on several cross-sections of the trunk. A classifier composed of three support vector machines was trained and tested using the data of 97 patients with scoliosis. A prediction rate of 72.2% was obtained, showing that the use of the trunk surface for a high-level scoliosis classification is feasible and promising.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations23
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicScoliosis diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207