Prospectively Collected Comparison of Outcomes Between Surgically and Conservatively Treated Patients With Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of a prospectively collected multicenter registry. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate health-related quality of life (HRQOL) measures in an operative cohort of patients (OP) and compare them with a matched nonoperative cohort (NON). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Historically, the surgical outcomes of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) have been radiographically evaluated. However, the importance of HRQOL measures and their impact on surgical outcomes are increasingly being understood. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified 90 NON patients with curves in the operative range who were observed for at least two years. These patients were matched with an OP cohort of 689 patients. All patients completed the Scoliosis Research Society-22 (SRS-22) questionnaire at the initial evaluation and at a minimum of two-year follow-up. Subgroup comparisons were based on curve type: primary thoracic (Th), primary thoracolumbar/lumbar (TL/L), and double major (DM) curves. RESULTS: The preoperative major curves in the Th, TL/L, and DM OP subgroups averaged 50.4°, 45.4°, and 51.5°, respectively, and 49.4°, 43.7°, and 48.9° in the NON cohort ( P >0.05). At two years postoperatively, the major curve in the Th, TL/L, and DM OP subgroups improved to 19.0°, 19.2°, and 19.3°, respectively, compared with the progression to 51.3°, 44.5°, and 49.7° in the NON group at two-year follow-up ( P <0.05). The SRS-22 self-image, mental health, satisfaction, and total scores at the two-year follow-up were significantly better in all OP subgroups ( P <0.001) but remained largely unchanged in the NON group. A significant percentage of patients ( P <0.001) in the OP cohort reported better SRS-22 scores at the two-year follow-up in the self-image, mental health, and satisfaction domains than the NON group at two years. CONCLUSIONS: Surgically treated patients with AIS have improved HRQOL outcomes in several domains compared with age-matched and curve magnitude-matched nonoperatively treated patients at two-year follow-up.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".