Spontaneous recovery of postsurgical progressive cervical spine kyphosis following intramedullary spinal cord tumor resection in a 4-year-old boy: illustrative case
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Postsurgical kyphosis is relatively common in children who have undergone resection of intramedullary spinal cord tumors. Progressive kyphosis almost always requires instrumentation and fusion surgery, which can delay or interfere with adjuvant oncological treatments and can deleteriously impact the long-term performance status of the patient. OBSERVATIONS: Here, the authors report a case of near-complete spontaneous recovery (i.e., without spinal fusion surgery) of postsurgical progressive cervical spine kyphosis following intramedullary spinal cord tumor resection and discuss the potential factors that may have contributed to this positive outcome. LESSONS: This case serves as a reminder that spontaneous recovery from postsurgical progressive cervical spine kyphosis can occur and that some patients (i.e., those without neurological deficits) can be monitored closely, with a watch-and-wait approach, before subjecting them to additional surgical risks, delays in other treatments, and potential morbidity. https://thejns.org/doi/10.3171/CASE24187.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".