MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2149280323 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2004.1349686

Re-positioning effects of a full torso imaging system for the assessment of scoliosis

2004· article· en· W2149280323 on OpenAlexaff
Peter O. Ajemba, N.G. Durdle, Doug Hill, V.J. Raso

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicScoliosis diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsGlenrose Rehabilitation HospitalUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTorsoScoliosisStandard deviationIdiopathic scoliosisBreathingCross section (physics)Computer scienceNuclear medicineMedicineComputer visionMathematicsAnatomyPhysicsSurgeryStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effect of re-positioning (sway and breathing) on the reproduction accuracy of a low-cost torso imaging system for monitoring idiopathic scoliosis is assessed. The system utilizes a rotating positioning frame and a 3D digitizer. Four images taken at 90 degree intervals are needed to generate a torso image. Five volunteers having no scoliosis were used for the study. Four torso images of each volunteer were obtained. Ten evenly-spaced cross-sections are computed for each torso image. The distance between the centroids of successive cross-sections and a reference vertical axis are computed at each cross-section. The standard deviation of this distance at each cross-section is indicative of the variability due to sway. The variability due to breathing is assessed by computing the standard deviation of the widths and lengths of each cross-section for each volunteer. Results obtained indicate that the torso imaging system is adequate for assessing idiopathic scoliosis.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.302 · 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

Citations3
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicScoliosis diagnosis and treatment→French-language works237,207→