Is there any relationship between scoliosis, cervical pain and postural imbalance in Parkinson’s disease? A cross-sectional pilot study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Parkinson's disease (PD) is defined by progressive worsening of gait, posture, and balance, as well as disability in daily life activities, and improvement in chronic musculoskeletal pain, particularly neck pain associated with worsening of balance. The study's goal is to look into the relationship between scoliosis, balance, and cervical pain in Parkinson's disease patients. Cross-sectional, pilot study. The study included 16 Parkinson's patients. Neck cervical pain was measured using the pain visual analogue scale and the short form McGill pain questionnaire, while dynamic balance was assessed using static balance, Tinetti, Berg Balance, and the Short Physical Performance Battery scales (SPPB). Cobb angles are measured on a whole-spine standard X-ray to assess spinal scoliosis.An observational statistical analysis was performed with patients subdivided into two groups: non-scoliosis (NS) and true scoliosis (TS) based on whether they presented a Cobb's angle below or ≥10°. Neck pain was reported by 37% (n=3) of participants in the NS group versus 50% (n=4) in the TS group. Neck pain was more prevalent in patients with a disease duration of less than 48 months (n=6; 75.0% vs n=1; 12.5%; p-value < 0.05). Scoliosis, cervical pain, and postural imbalance are all significant but often overlooked Parkinson's disease complaints.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".