MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2740442773 · doi:10.1049/htl.2017.0069

Application of an RGBD augmented C‐arm for minimally invasive scoliosis surgery assistance

2017· article· en· W2740442773 on OpenAlexaff
Séverine Habert, Ulrich Eck, Pascal Fallavollita, Stefan Parent, Nassir Navab, Farida Chériet

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Technology Letters · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicScoliosis diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineUniversity of Ottawa
FundersDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsScoliosisCoronal planeSagittal planeFluoroscopyMedicineTrunkComputer scienceInvasive surgerySurgeryRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Minimally invasive surgeries (MISs) are gaining popularity as alternatives to conventional open surgeries. In thoracoscopic scoliosis MIS, fluoroscopy is used to guide pedicle screw placement and to visualise the effect of the intervention on the spine curvature. However, cosmetic external appearance is the most important concern for patients, while correction of the spine and achieving coronal and sagittal trunk balance are the top priorities for surgeons. The authors present the feasibility study of the first intra-operative assistive system for scoliosis surgery composed of a single RGBD camera affixed on a C-arm which allows visualising in real time the surgery effects on the patient trunk surface in the transverse plane. They perform three feasibility experiments from simulated data based on scoliotic patients to live acquisition from non-scoliotic mannequin and person, all showing that the proposed system accuracy is comparable with scoliotic surface reconstruction state of art.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare Technology LettersSame topicScoliosis diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207