Transitioning spine care from the pediatric to adult center: Challenges and future directions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Study design Anonymous, survey-based prospective study. Objectives The objective of this study was to evaluate the current practice patterns and opinions of surgeons treating pediatric spinal deformity patients into adulthood. Methods An electronic survey regarding the transition process of pediatric patients into adulthood was administered to members of the ISSG (International Spine Study Group) and HSG (Harms Study Group). The survey covered themes such as protocols of transition of care, deformities recommended for follow-up into adulthood and institutional capability as well as organization for future follow-up into adulthood. Results of the survey were described in frequencies. Statistical analyses to detect differences in responses between groups were performed when appropriate. Results A total of 56 responses were analyzed. 85 % of the members of the HSG responded to the survey (41 out of 48 surgeons), and 42 % of members from the ISSG responded (15 out of 36). A third of the respondents described having the institutional capability to follow-up with patients of any age. Most (60 %) of the ISSG members continue to follow-up with their pediatric patients into adulthood. For the question about treatment plans for patients who cannot be followed due to age, there was significant differences in referral patterns following pediatric care (p = .0006). Furthermore, HSG significantly discussed more about transitional care planning with patients and their families compared to ISSG ( p = .001). Conclusions Although more than 80 % of respondents somewhat discussed transitional care for spinal deformity, more than 90 % do not have a formal transitional care protocol. There is a clear lack of both uniformity and standards for transitional care for spinal deformity. It is imperative to develop and disseminate standards of transitional care for youth with spinal deformities. This work encourages all specialty societies including the Scoliosis Research Society and all professionals involved with youth transitional care to lead future work. Level of evidence V
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".