MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411221207 · doi:10.1007/s00586-025-08955-1

Morphological characteristics of the thoracolumbar fascia: relationship to chronic low back pain and back extension strength

2025· article· en· W4411221207 on OpenAlexaff
François Caron, Neda Naghdi, Olivia C Iorio, Cléo Bertrand, Maryse Fortin

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Spine Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMyofascial pain diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNeurosurgeryLow back painBack painFasciaExtension (predicate logic)AnatomySurgeryPathologyAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between different characteristics of the Thoracolumbar Fascia (TLF) (e.g., length, epimuscular fat distribution) with pain status and lumbar extension strength in a sample of participants with and without chronic low back pain (CLBP). This cross-sectional study included 27 individuals with CLBP (10 males, 17 females; mean age 41.45 ± 11.21 year) and 25 healthy controls (12 males, 13 females; mean age 36.56 ± 11.43 year). The length of the posterior (pTLF), middle (mTLF), and anterior (aTLF) TLF layers, the TLF circumference, and the distribution of epimuscular fat around the paraspinal muscles were assessed at L4 and L5 using MRI. Pain severity was collected using a visual analogue scale (VAS), and lumbar extension strength was measured using the MedX lumbar extension machine. ANCOVA testing and multiple regression models were used to assess possible differences in TLF characteristics between participants with and without CLBP, and partial correlations were used to assess the relationship between TLF characteristics and extension strength. We found no significant differences in TLF morphological characteristics between participants with and without CLBP. None of the TLF characteristics or epimuscular fat characteristics investigated were correlated with pain severity. Participants with CLBP showed no correlation between pTLF length and strength (r avg = 0.276, r max = 0.421, p > 0.05) contrary to healthy controls (r avg = 0.527, r max = 0.554, p < 0.05). The TLF circumference (r maxL4 = 0.495 r maxL5 = 0.571, p < 0.05) and fat surface of contact (r avgL4 = 0.709, r maxL4 = 0.596, p < 0.05) in CLBP participants were significantly correlated with back extension strength, contrary to healthy controls. Future studies investigating TLF characteristics at multiple spinal levels while also considering the multidirectional and multilayered implications of the TLF are needed to better clarify the role of TLF morphology in spine biomechanics.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.566
Threshold uncertainty score0.327

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Spine JournalSame topicMyofascial pain diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207