Systematic Review of Postural Assessment in Individuals With Obstructive Respiratory Conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Changes in posture in individuals with an obstructive respiratory disease have been reported, but the extent of these deviations and their clinical significance is not well understood. This study aimed to systematically review the literature of the skeletal structural alignment in children and adults with an obstructive respiratory disease, describe the measurement techniques used, and determine the clinical relevance of any alternations. METHODS: Observational cohort or cross-sectional studies of postural assessment were identified, with 2 reviewers independently assessing study quality. RESULTS: A total of 18 studies were included, 12 in cystic fibrosis (CF), 5 in asthma, and 1 in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The overall quality assessment rating was 12.6 out of 16. Increased thoracic kyphosis or scoliosis was found in both children and adults with CF. Increased shoulder protraction and elevation were evident in asthma and COPD, although changes in spinal curvature were variable. The clinical impact of postural changes was diverse, with an inconsistent influence on lung function. A mix of methods was applied for postural assessment. CONCLUSIONS: Skeletal structural malalignment appears to be present in some individuals with an obstructive respiratory disease, although the extent of alterations and its clinical impact is variable. Photogrammetry is used to provide a comprehensive assessment of posture in these populations.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".