Radiological and Clinical Outcome of Non Surgical Management for Pediatric High Grade Spondylolisthesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe and compare the quality of life of patients with pediatric high-grade spondylolisthesis managed non-operatively and operatively. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Some authors consider pediatric high-grade spondylolisthesis as an absolute indication for surgery, regardless of symptoms while others sometimes recommend observation in asymptomatic patients. Very little is known about the indications and outcome of non-operatively managed high-grade spondylolisthesis. METHODS: A prospective database comprising all the spondylolisthesis cases from a single pediatric institution was reviewed in order to identify all cases of high grade spondylolisthesis. Quality of life data from Short form (SF)-12 and Scoliosis Research Society (SRS)-22 questionnaires were collected. Non-operatively treated patients were identified and compared to surgically treated patients at baseline and at last follow-up. RESULTS: 34 spondylolisthesis were identified as high grade and 5 of them were non-operatively treated. Quality of life questionnaires showed less impairment in the non-operative group when compared to the surgical group preoperatively. Moreover at last follow-up, quality of life questionnaires were similar between the two groups. There was no worsening of quality of life observed in non-operative patients during follow-up. CONCLUSION: The quality of life after surgical treatment of high grade spondylolisthesis is similar to that of patients with high grade spondylolisthesis and mild symptoms undergoing non-operative treatment.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".