Brace Monitoring System for the Treatment of Scoliosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Determining the efficacy of brace treatment for AIS has been hampered by poor data on the wear pattern of those children prescribed this treatment. Although there is some information on brace compliance, there is very little on how well the brace is secured and the resulting loads imposed on the trunk. The purpose of this study was to determine the daily brace wear pattern of adolescents prescribed Boston braces. The brace monitoring system consists of a force transducer and a microcomputer unit. A force transducer was placed in the lining of the Boston brace. The microcomputer unit was carried while the brace was worn. The force imposed by the brace pad during daily activity was recorded at 1 minute intervals over a period of 3 to 14 days. The samples were stored by the microcomputer. Five subjects (3F;2M; age: 14+/-2 years) who were to wear the brace full time were studied. The subjects adjusted their braces to a prescribed level of tightness as indicated by a light on the microcomputer. Overall compliance, compliance during school days, and forces imposed by the brace were analysed. The force provided by the Boston brace varies considerably during daily activity. Overall brace compliance was lower than expected, with 2 of 5 subjects wearing their brace infrequently. The compliance rate during school time was not different than during the rest of the study period. Peer pressure at school did not appear to affect brace compliance.
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 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".