MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2767274659 · doi:10.1186/s40814-017-0193-0

Understanding muscle-immune interactions in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a feasibility study

2017· article· en· W2767274659 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Srikesh Rudrapatna, Devin Peterson, Paul Missiuna, Ishan Aditya, Brian Drew, Nicola Sahar, Lehana Thabane, M. Constantine Samaan

Bibliographic record

VenuePilot and Feasibility Studies · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicScoliosis diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsHamilton Health SciencesMcMaster Children's HospitalSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonImpactMcMaster University
FundersMcMaster UniversityHamilton Health Sciences
KeywordsMedicineScoliosisImmune systemPhysical therapyInternal medicinePediatricsSurgeryImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is the most common form of scoliosis in children, and its cause remains unknown. The Immune-metabolic CONnections to Scoliosis (ICONS) Study was designed to elucidate the potential mechanisms by which immune system-paraspinal muscle crosstalk contributes to the development of AIS. In this report, we document the evaluation of ICONS Study feasibility. This study was conducted at a tertiary pediatric academic center in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. We included boys and girls, aged 10–17 years with a diagnosis of AIS requiring corrective spinal surgery. Exclusion criteria included patients on high-dose steroids, immunosuppressive therapy, anti-thrombotic medications, those with an active infection for 15 days before participation , autoimmune disease, pregnancy, and patients who were unwilling to consent. Pre-determined feasibility criteria included permission to approach participants and recruitment rates of 80%, consenting of at least 80% of participants to provide biological samples, 90% or higher case report form and questionnaire completion, resources to be sufficient in at least 80% of recruitments, and the ability to successfully collect and process 80% or more of the biological samples needed for this study. Between August 2013 and October 2014, we identified 32 potential participants with AIS, but had the resources to approach only 16, of which 12 (75%) agreed to be approached by the research team, and all consented to participate. Of the 12 participants recruited, 11 questionnaire packages and muscle biopsies (91.7% for each objective) were collected, while other biological samples (serum, plasma, whole blood for DNA and RNA processing, urine) were collected from all participants. The ICONS study protocols and procedures are feasible. However, recruitment rates were less than predicted. For the full study, we plan on prolonging the recruitment phase and the inclusion of additional centers to achieve recruitment targets.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.643
GPT teacher head0.479
Teacher spread0.164 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations10
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePilot and Feasibility StudiesSame topicScoliosis diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207