PEDIATRIC IDIOPATHIC INTERVERTEBRAL DISC CALCIFICATION: A SINGLE INSTITUTION CASE SERIES OF A RARE DISORDER
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract BACKGROUND Paediatric idiopathic intervertebral disc calcification (PIIVDC) is a rare, poorly understood condition with just over 300 reported cases in the literature since the first report in 1924. The condition is characterized by calcification of an intervertebral disc which can progress to inflammation or extrusion and lead to neck or spinal pain in some patients. OBJECTIVES We report a series of patients seen at a single institution with PIIVDC and outline the disease course, management and outcome and review the literature. DESIGN/METHODS A retrospective chart review was performed at a single institution spanning the period between January 2001 and February 2016 for diagnoses of PIIVDC. Patient age, gender, symptoms, and medical history and physical and neurologic findings were reviewed. Laboratory and imaging findings, management, follow-up, and outcome were also studied. A literature review was carried out by MEDLINE and Embase, using the search terms “pediatric disc calcification” and “disc calcification in children” between the years 1997 and 2017, in the English language. Articles were reviewed and data was extracted. RESULTS Nine cases of PIIVDC were identified (6 males, 3 females) with an age range of 1 to 14 years. Two patients were asymptomatic and PIIVDC was discovered incidentally. Of the remaining patients, five presented with neck/back pain, one painless torticollis, and one painful torticollis. One patient was noted to have pain radiating along one dermatome. Disc spaces affected were five cervical, five thoracic, and two lumbar, with two patients having more than one space affected. All patients were managed conservatively. In one case, symptoms and lesions persisted after 5-years, but the remainder had complete symptom resolution, generally within 6 months. CONCLUSION Although the etiology of PIIVDC remains unknown it appears to occur spontaneously, without preceding trauma or underlying medical condition. A conservative approach to patients without severe neurologic deficit with out-patient close follow-up is supported.
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 | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".