Does curve magnitude in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) affect frequency and quality of sport participation? A feasibility study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This pilot study explores whether large adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) curves (≥ 45°) lead to decreased frequency and quality of sport participation, lower health-related quality of life (HRQL), and more pronounced shortness of breath (SOB) as compared to smaller curvatures (< 45°). METHODS: Patients were divided into two groups based on their spinal curvature: Cobb angle < 45° (n = 31) and ≥ 45° (n = 21). We assessed feasibility outcomes including agreement to be approached, participation, recruitment rates and missing data. All participants completed five questionnaires to assess the frequency and quality of sport participation, HRQL and SOB outcomes. Estimates of effects 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were reported. RESULTS: This study enrolled 52 surgically untreated AIS patients between the ages of 10 and 18 (44 females, 8 males, mean age = 14.60). All feasibility threshold criteria were successfully met (100% agreement to be approached, 100% participation with n ≥ 12 in each group, and 94.2% of patients without missing data). AIS patients with large curvatures (≥ 45°) trended towards decreased frequency and quality of sport participation, more pronounced SOB and worse HRQL outcomes, as compared to patients with smaller curve sizes. CONCLUSION: The study findings show that a study addressing sport participation in the setting of AIS is feasible. The size of curvature in AIS may have an impact on sport participation, HRQL and SOB, but larger studies are required.
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 | 0.006 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".