MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W338261123 · doi:10.1186/1748-7161-10-s1-o37

Reliability of coronal curvature measurements on 3D ultrasound images for AIS

2015· article· en· W338261123 on OpenAlexaff
Edmond Lou, Rui Zheng, Amanda CY Chan, Douglas L. Hill, Marc Moreau, Douglas Hedden, James Mahood, Sarah Southon

Bibliographic record

VenueScoliosis · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicScoliosis diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsAlberta HealthUniversity of AlbertaAlberta Health Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInterclass correlationStandard deviationRadiographyCoronal planeCobb angleScoliosisOrthodonticsReliability (semiconductor)Standard errorNuclear medicineInter-rater reliabilityGold standard (test)Intraclass correlationRadiologySurgeryMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ionizing radiation exposure is a concern for children with scoliosis. A pilot study demonstrated that a proxy Cobb angle can be obtained from spinal ultrasound (US) images. The objective was to evaluate the reliability and comparison to radiographic Cobb angle of the coronal curvatures measurements from the US images on AIS patients. Forty participants (35F, 5M; mean age 14.0±2.0 years) who (1) were diagnosed with AIS, (2) had no prior spine surgical treatment, (3) had radiographs on the study day that were not in-brace, and (4) had the major Cobb angle less than 45°, were recruited consecutively from the local scoliosis clinics. All US images and radiographs were acquired in standing positions within an hour of each other. Three raters, who were blinded to the clinical information, measured the Cobb angles from the US and x-ray images at least 3 days apart. The raters repeated these measurements at least 1 week apart to minimize memory bias. The mean absolute deviation (MAD) and the standard deviation (SD) between the two measurements methods were used to estimate the reliability of the US measurement. The intra- and inter-rater reliabilities were assessed by calculating the interclass correlation coefficients and standard errors of measurement (SEM). 78 curves (23.3±6.8° ; range:12-45°) including 44 major curves (25.2±7.3°)were recognized from the radiographs. 63 curves including 42 major curves were detected on the US images. Among the 3 raters, the MAD±SD between the US and radiography measurements were 3.8±2.7°, 4.3±3.1°, and 3.4±2.8°, respectively. The ICC(2,1) values of the intra- and inter-rater reliability of the US measurements ranged from 0.85-0.94, and 0.80-0.87, respectively. The correlation coefficient (R) between the two methods ranged from 0.71-0.76 for major curves and 0.73-0.79 for all curves. The SEM of the major curves and overall were 3.4° and 3.8°, respectively. Although only 80% of the curves could be recognized from the US images, 95% of the major curves were detected on US images. Most of the curves missed using ultrasound were non-treated curves (non-structural), many of which were in the upper thoracic region. The mean differences between the two measurement methods were within the clinically accepted error of 5°. The high ICC values indicate that the US method is reliable. Further work will explore sensitivity to change in US compared to radiographic Cobb. Use of US for scoliosis monitoring may reduce ionizing exposure to children with scoliosis by replacing some radiographs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.149
Threshold uncertainty score0.605

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScoliosisSame topicScoliosis diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207