MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3213188682 · doi:10.1016/j.bas.2021.100182

A comparison of the reliability and vulnerability of 3D stereos and 2D EOS when measuring the sagittal spinal alignment of patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis

2021· article· en· W3213188682 on OpenAlexaff
Brett Rocos, Masayoshi Machida, Karl Zabjek, Reinhard Zeller, David E. Lebel

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain and Spine · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicScoliosis diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSagittal planeReliability (semiconductor)ScoliosisIdiopathic scoliosisVulnerability (computing)OrthodonticsMedicinePsychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationComputer sciencePsychiatryPhysicsRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background context: Vertebral compression fractures are frequent in the aging population, and are regularly treated by percutaneous vertebroplasty or kyphoplasty.Advances related to computerized navigation allow a more accurate surgery without new imaging acquisition, and related irradiation.New technologies trend to optimize the irradiation for the patient.Purpose: The objective was to compare results of O-arm navigation and new allin-one 2D/3D Surgivisio device in percutaneous cementoplasty procedures.Material & Methods: We retrospectively reported the results of all patients prospectively included for percutaneous navigated vertebroplasty or kyphoplasty for vertebral compression fractures during an 18-month duration in two spine centers.Demographic, operative and irradiation data were collected, as well as the image quality subjectively evaluated by the surgeon.Effective dose (E) in millisievert (mSv) was calculated using the PCXMC software and the recommendations of the International Commission for Radiological Protection.Results: 121 patients were included, 60 in the O-arm group and 61 in the Surgivisio group.A total of 161 vertebrae were analyzed.Compared to the Surgivisio group, E was significantly higher in the O-arm group, with a mean of 11.58 versus 1.14 mSv respectively (p < 0.001).2D part of E received by the surgeon was also significantly higher in the O-arm group, with an average of 2.18 versus 0.47 mSv respectively, p < 0.001.Operative time was also significantly higher in the O-arm group (34.17 versus 30.12 minutes respectively, p ¼ 0.044).ANOVA method showed no correlation between E and surgeon level for both groups (p ¼ 0.240 and p ¼ 0.171 respectively).Image quality was similarly sufficient in 3D but significantly better in the O-arm group in 2D (p ¼ 0.013).Conclusion: With a 10 times higher radiation exposure with the use of the Oarm, technological advances in intraoperative imaging showed a clear dose reduction for patients and surgeons during percutaneous navigated cementoplasty, while keeping a sufficient image quality to perform the surgery.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueBrain and SpineSame topicScoliosis diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207