The effect of time on qualitative compliance in brace treatment for AIS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Brace treatment is the most commonly used non-surgical treatment method for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). This study is to determine the force changes exerted by a brace over time during both day and night-time wear and to explore correlations between force changes to bracing outcomes. Twenty subjects (three male, 17 female) diagnosed with idiopathic scoliosis who had worn their braces for six months participated into this study. However, due to non-continuous brace wear and exclusion of subjects with large curves (Cobb angle >40 degrees), only nine subjects were included into the day-time analysis and 11 subjects were included into night-time analysis. All subjects used a load monitor system from four days up to 14 days with Boston braces. Cobb angle measurements were taken at initiation of brace treatment as well as after weaning upon completion of the treatment. After the monitoring period, the data was extracted and analyzed. Forces were compared between hours 1, 2, and 5 for the day and night groups, and the correlation of force changes to bracing outcomes were analyzed. In daytime wear, a significant decrease in force over time was found. Most of the decrease occurred within hours 1 and 2 of brace wear. There was no significant decrease during night wear. There were no significant correlations between force decline and outcome.
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 | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".