Intra-operative tracking of the trunk during surgical correction of scoliosis: A feasibility study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of a technique for intra-operative tracking of the trunk during scoliosis surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eleven magnetic sensors placed on specific anatomical landmarks are used to compute 11 geometric indices of the trunk. This technique was assessed on a cohort of 40 subjects (19 normal, 21 scoliotic) using an experimental set-up simulating the position of patients during scoliosis surgery. RESULTS: The indices varied less than 2 mm and 1 degrees when breathing (except for chest AP diameter), and less than 1 mm and 1 degrees after transient displacement from the initial positioning of the subjects. No significant changes were observed for most of the indices between two acquisition sessions. Comparison between normal and scoliotic subjects demonstrated that the trunk geometry is more influenced by the positioning of each subject on the operating table than by the magnitude of the spinal deformity. CONCLUSION: The proposed technique will allow intra-operative tracking of the trunk and enable the surgeon to optimize the correction of both spinal and trunk deformities. The technique can also be used to evaluate the adequacy of patient positioning on the operating table, and to obtain a complete follow-up of patients in pre-, intra-, and post-surgical conditions.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it