MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403515253 · doi:10.1093/jbmr/zjae172

Association of vertebral fractures with worsening degenerative changes of the spine: a longitudinal study

2024· article· en· W4403515253 on OpenAlexaff
Carrie Ye, William D. Leslie, Mary Bouxsein, Alyssa B. Dufour, Ali Guermazi, Daniel Habtemariam, Mohamed Jarraya, Douglas P. Kiel, Pradeep Suri, Elizabeth J. Samelson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bone and Mineral Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and osteoporosis research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institutes of HealthNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin DiseasesU.S. Department of Health and Human Services
KeywordsSPINE (molecular biology)MedicineAssociation (psychology)OrthodonticsBiologyPsychologyBioinformatics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vertebral compression fractures (VFs) and spinal degeneration are both common causes of back pain, particularly in older adults. Previous cross-sectional studies have shown a potential association between these entities, but there is limited evidence on the role of VFs in spinal degeneration. In this longitudinal study, we evaluated the association between prevalent VFs and the subsequent progression of facet joint osteoarthritis (FJOA) and intervertebral disc height narrowing (DHN), using data from the Framingham Heart Study Offspring and Third Generation Multi-Detector Computed Tomography study. Summary indices representing the total burden of each spinal parameter (VFs, DHN, and FJOA) were calculated for each individual. We hypothesized that prevalent VFs are associated with worsening spinal degeneration. Three hundred and seventy (31%) of 1197 participants had a baseline (prevalent) VF. The change in summary index of DHN over the follow-up period was significantly higher in those with vs without prevalent VF (difference in change in DHN 0.38, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.59, p<.001), but the change in summary index of FJOA was similar between those with and without prevalent VF. However, once adjusted for age, sex, cohort, smoking status, BMI, and baseline DHN, the change in summary index of DHN did not differ by prevalent VF status. There was a modestly higher change in the FJOA summary index in those with prevalent VFs compared to those without in the fully adjusted model (difference in change in FJOA 0.62, 95% CI -0.01 to 1.24, p = .054), driven primarily by those with severe (grade 3) VF (difference in change in FJOA 4.48, 95% CI 1.99-6.97). Moreover, there was greater change in the summary index of FJOA with increasing severity of prevalent VF (linear trend p = .005). Beyond the established morbidity and mortality associated with VFs, our study suggests that VFs may also lead to worsening spine osteoarthritis.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.356 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Bone and Mineral ResearchSame topicBone health and osteoporosis researchFrench-language works237,207