A new concept for the non-invasive treatment of Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis: The Corrective Movement<sup>©</sup>principle integrated in the SpineCor System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the change in spinal curvature and posture of Idiopathic Scoliosis patients when a curve specific 'Corrective Movement Principle' (CMP) is applied. METHODS: This prospective interventional study was carried out on a group of 639 patients (92.3% females) having idiopathic scoliosis treated with the SpineCor brace. All girls were premenarchal or less than 1 year postmenarchal. Assessment of brace effectiveness followed the SRS outcome criteria for bracing. The clinical, radiological and postural evaluations assisted to define the patient classification, which guided the unique application of the CMP to each type of curvature. RESULTS: A total of 583 patients met the outcome criteria. Overall, 349 patients have a definitive outcome. Successful treatment was achieved in 259 (74.2%) of the 349 patients from the fitting to the weaning of the brace. Some 51 immature patients (14.6%) required surgical fusion while receiving treatment. Eight mature patients out of 298 (2.7%) required surgery within 2 years of follow-up beyond skeletal maturity. CONCLUSION: The SpineCor brace is effective for the treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Moreover, positive outcomes are maintained after 2 years because 151 (93.2%) of 162 patients stabilized or corrected their end of bracing Cobb angle up to 2 years after bracing.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".