MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134261887 · doi:10.1080/17483100801903913

A new concept for the non-invasive treatment of Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis: The Corrective Movement<sup>©</sup>principle integrated in the SpineCor System

2008· article· en· W2134261887 on OpenAlexaff
Christine Coillard, A Circo, Charles H. Rivard

Bibliographic record

VenueDisability and Rehabilitation Assistive Technology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicScoliosis diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBraceScoliosisMedicineIdiopathic scoliosisCobb angleBracingRadiological weaponPhysical therapySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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)0.001
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 score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.653

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations22
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDisability and Rehabilitation Assistive TechnologySame topicScoliosis diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207