Is Propionibacterium acnes related to disc degeneration in adults? A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this paper was to systematically review the evidence linking Propionibacterium acnes (P. acnes) with the development of symptomatic degenerative disc disease. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Data were obtained from MEDLINE from their inception to October 2015. Two authors independently conducted the searches, extracted data and completed methodological quality assessments. Articles were included if they investigated the presence of P. acnes in symptomatic degenerative disc disease through intra-operative cultural examination. The methodological quality of the studies was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Overall 641 articles were retrieved with 9 cross-sectional studies being included in the review. All selected studies revealed an association between P. acnes and disc degeneration. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that there is a relationship between P. acnes and development of symptomatic degenerative disc disease. Despite this, we cannot support that P. acnes and development of symptomatic degenerative disc disease due to the low quality of the results according Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).
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 | 0.005 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".