Effectiveness of traditional Chinese and Western Scoliosis-specific Exercises and Practices for Treating Adult Idiopathic Scoliosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Non-surgical treatments for adult idiopathic scoliosis is sometimes prescribed for patients as an alternative to surgical interventions, but their effectiveness is uncertain. Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of the Schroth method, SEAS, and TCM on reducing Cobb angle in adult idiopathic scoliosis. Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: Database indexing services were used to search for applicable studies. Studies are eligible if their subjects are adults, used Schroth, SEAS, or TCM, and reported pre- and post-treatment Cobb angles. Meta-analysis was performed to determine effectiveness and compare the methods. Results: With support from select, low-quality articles with unclear to high risk of bias, Schroth, SEAS, and TCM are effective in reducing Cobb angle for adult patients with idiopathic scoliosis. Conclusion: Alternate, non-surgical methods for treating adult idiopathic may be effective in reducing Cobb angle. However, further high-quality research must be conducted to validate the effectiveness. Keywords : Adult idiopathic scoliosis, Schroth, SEAS, traditional Chinese medicine
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".