MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4316927813 · doi:10.5435/jaaos-d-21-01175

Updated Criteria for Fusion Level Selection in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Including Use of Three-Dimensional Analysis

2023· article· en· W4316927813 on OpenAlexaff
Suken A. Shah, Jeffrey Henstenburg, Peter O. Newton, Stefan Parent

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicScoliosis diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsSpinologics (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIdiopathic scoliosisScoliosisLimitingDeformitySpinal fusionSpinal deformityLumbarSelection (genetic algorithm)Bony fusionRotation (mathematics)OrthodonticsPhysical medicine and rehabilitationSurgeryRadiographyComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The development of new technologies and an enhanced understanding of the three-dimensional deformity in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis has led to advances in surgical management of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Posterior spinal approaches with pedicle screw constructs are now standard of care because they allow for powerful rotation maneuvers with three-column deformity correction. Selective fusion of the main curve while allowing for spontaneous correction of compensatory curves should be attempted whenever possible in the interest of limiting fusion size and preserving spinal mobility. Recent research provides updated criteria to determine optimal candidates for selective fusion. These criteria must be weighed against patient goals and patient-specific factors to limit complications and maximize chances of successful deformity correction.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.139
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic SurgeonsSame topicScoliosis diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207