MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2572833503 · doi:10.1055/s-0035-1554134

Impact of Regional and Focal Cervical Alignment on Myelopathy Severity: Report of 151 Patients

2015· article· en· W2572833503 on OpenAlexaff
Themistocles S. Protopsaltis, Michael G. Fehlings, Shian Liu, Justin S. Smith, Virginie Lafage, Christopher I. Shaffrey, Han Jo Kim, Paul M. Arnold, Jens R. Chapman, Renaud Lafage, Vincent Challier, Frank Schwab, Eric M. Massicotte, S. Tim Yoon, Christopher P. Ames

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Spine Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical and Thoracic Myelopathy
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineKyphosisMyelopathySagittal planeCohortPopulationLordosisPelvic tiltOrthopedic surgeryProspective cohort studySurgeryRadiographyInternal medicineRadiologySpinal cord

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Cervical sagittal alignment (C2–C7 SVA) has been correlated to myelopathy severity but kyphosis as a regional parameter has not been demonstrated to correlate with health-related quality of life (HRQOL) measures. We hypothesized that regional and focal sagittal cervical alignment may also correlate with HRQOLs in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM). Patients and Methods Post hoc analysis of a prospective, multicenter database of patients with CSM. A total of 151 patients met inclusion criteria (47%): symptomatic CSM, age > 18 years, baseline lateral radiographs, modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) and neck disability index (NDI). Average age was 56.3 ± 11.7 years with females making up 43.9% ( n = 69) of the study population. Regional alignment and HRQOLs were analyzed with patients stratified into a high-cSVA group (hiSVA, n = 45, 0.5 SD ≥ mean) or a low cSVA group (loSVA, n = 43, 0.5 SD ≤ mean). Focal alignment (kyphosis and olisthesis between adjacent vertebrae) analysis was also conducted. Results The hiSVA (mean cSVA 39.4 ± 7.4 mm) cohort had a significantly worse mJOA than the loSVA (mean cSVA 11.31 ± 5.3 mm) cohort (mean mJOA 12.5 vs. 13.7, p = 0.037). No significant correlations between C2–C7 lordosis and HRQOLs existed. There were significant correlations with focal alignment and worse clinical assessments: max sagittal slip with mJOA ( R = −0.24, p = 0.002) and Nurick ( R = 0.18, p = 0.024). Level of slip was also significant, with olisthesis at higher levels correlating with worse health status. Number of kyphotic segments also positively correlated with NDI ( R = 0.19, p < 0.001). Conclusion Similar to previous studies, high baseline cSVA correlated with significantly worse mJOA. Interestingly, the mean cSVA of the hiSVA cohort was 39.4 ± 7.4 mm, suggesting that 40 mm may be a potential threshold below which cervical sagittal malalignment should be corrected. Regarding focal alignment, increased olisthesis is correlated with worse mJOA and Nurick grade, especially at higher cervical levels. Even focal abnormalities all along the cervical spine are correlated with worse NDI, demonstrating that while level of olisthesis may matter, the number of vertebrae with a kyphotic relationship may also cause pain and disability.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Spine JournalSame topicCervical and Thoracic MyelopathyFrench-language works237,207