The diagnostic accuracy of community spine radiology for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis brace candidates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The study aims to establish the diagnostic accuracy of community spine x-rays for brace candidates. METHODS: A review of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients seen for initial visit at a tertiary care pediatric hospital was conducted (n = 170). The index test was the pre-referral community spine x-ray interpreted by a community radiologist. Measures of diagnostic accuracy for the index test were determined against the reference standard if images were obtained within 90 days (n = 111). The reference standard was the 3-foot standing EOS spine x-ray evaluated by spine specialists. Diagnostic criterion for a brace candidate was dichotomized by Cobb angle range (25-40°) according to Scoliosis Research Society criteria. Risser stage was not included given significant missing data in index reports. To mitigate the uncertainty around true progression, sensitivity analyses were conducted on a sub-sample of data when index test was within 60 days of the reference standard (n = 67). RESULTS: Accuracy of the community spine x-ray to detect a brace candidate was 65.8% (95% CI 56.2-74.5). Sensitivity of the index test was 65.4% with a false negative rate of 34.6%. Specificity was 66.1% with a false positive rate of 33.9%. Positive and negative predictive values were 63.0% and 68.4%, respectively. Of the total number of brace candidates (n = 52), 32.7% were missed because of underestimation in Cobb angle (95% CI 21.5-46.2). The proportion of missed brace candidates because of underestimation was unchanged with 60-day data (p = 0.37). CONCLUSIONS: Inaccuracies in community spine radiology may lead to missed opportunities for non-operative treatment.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".