MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2297034624 · doi:10.1118/1.4940792

Postoperative 3D spine reconstruction by navigating partitioning manifolds

2016· article· en· W2297034624 on OpenAlexafffund
Samuel Kadoury, Hubert Labelle, Stefan Parent

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMedical Imaging and Analysis
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsMedical imagingComputer scienceIterative reconstructionSPINE (molecular biology)Computer visionGeologyMedical physicsArtificial intelligenceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The postoperative evaluation of scoliosis patients undergoing corrective treatment is an important task to assess the strategy of the spinal surgery. Using accurate 3D geometric models of the patient's spine is essential to measure longitudinal changes in the patient's anatomy. On the other hand, reconstructing the spine in 3D from postoperative radiographs is a challenging problem due to the presence of instrumentation (metallic rods and screws) occluding vertebrae on the spine. METHODS: This paper describes the reconstruction problem by searching for the optimal model within a manifold space of articulated spines learned from a training dataset of pathological cases who underwent surgery. The manifold structure is implemented based on a multilevel manifold ensemble to structure the data, incorporating connections between nodes within a single manifold, in addition to connections between different multilevel manifolds, representing subregions with similar characteristics. RESULTS: The reconstruction pipeline was evaluated on x-ray datasets from both preoperative patients and patients with spinal surgery. By comparing the method to ground-truth models, a 3D reconstruction accuracy of 2.24 ± 0.90 mm was obtained from 30 postoperative scoliotic patients, while handling patients with highly deformed spines. CONCLUSIONS: This paper illustrates how this manifold model can accurately identify similar spine models by navigating in the low-dimensional space, as well as computing nonlinear charts within local neighborhoods of the embedded space during the testing phase. This technique allows postoperative follow-ups of spinal surgery using personalized 3D spine models and assess surgical strategies for spinal deformities.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations10
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicMedical Imaging and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207