Physical Functioning in Adolescents with Idiopathic Scoliosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review. OBJECTIVE: To summarize evidence on measurement properties of Outcome Measures (OM) used to assess physical functioning in adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The AIS is a common spine deformity in those aged 10 to 18 years old. Associated health problems (e.g., back pain) significantly impact the quality of life (QoL). One important domain in QoL is physical functioning, which can be measured with patient-reported outcome measures (PROM), performance-based outcome measures (PBOM), and body structure and function OM. Adequate measurement properties of OM are important for precision in research and practice. METHODS: A two-staged search strategy was performed on electronic databases up to December 2019. Search one revealed a list of OM was used for physical functioning assessment in AIS. Search two identified studies that evaluated the measurement properties of OM in AIS; using the list identified in search one. Two independent reviewers determined study eligibility, risk of bias assessment (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments [COSMIN] checklist), and performed data extraction. The level of evidence was established using a modified GRADE approach. RESULTS: Search one yielded: 28 PROM, 20 PBOM, and 10 body structure and function OM. Search two revealed: 16 measurement properties studies for PROM, one for PBOM, and three for body structure and function measures. Construct validity, reliability, and responsiveness of most PROM has been established in AIS, but not content validity or internal consistency (moderate evidence). Construct validity was sufficient for the Timed Up and Go test and body structure and function measures (very low to low evidence). CONCLUSION: Currently, physical functioning is evaluated with a variety of measures in AIS. The majority of measurement properties studies evaluated PROM with a paucity of information on measurement properties of PBOM and body structure and function OM. Based on COSMIN methodology, none of the OM identified in this review can be recommended with confidence in individuals with AIS.Level of Evidence: 2.
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 | 0.011 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".