Paraspinal muscle pathophysiology associated with low back pain and spine degenerative disorders
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Low back pain disorders affect more than 80% of adults in their lifetime and are the leading cause of global disability. The muscles attaching to the spine (ie, paraspinal muscles) are critical for proper spine health and play a crucial role in the functioning of the spine and whole body; however, reports of muscle dysfunction and insufficiency in chronic LBP (CLBP) patients are common. This article presents a review of the current understanding of the relationship between paraspinal muscle pathophysiology and spine-related disorders. Human literature demonstrates a clear association between altered muscle structure/function, most notably fatty infiltration and fibrosis, and low back pain disorders; other associations, including muscle cell atrophy and fiber type changes, are less clear. Animal literature then provides some mechanistic insight into the complex relationships, including initiating factors and time courses, between the spine and spine muscles under pathological conditions. It is apparent that spine pathology can directly lead to changes in the paraspinal muscle structure, function, and biology. It also appears that changes to the muscle structure and function can directly lead to changes in the spine (eg, deformity); however, this relationship is less well studied. Future work must focus on providing insight into possible mechanisms that regulate spine and paraspinal muscle health, as well as probing how muscle degeneration/dysfunction might be an initiating factor in the progression of spine pathology.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 it