Wearable Devices in Scoliosis Treatment: A Scoping Review of Innovations and Challenges
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Scoliosis is one of the most common spinal deformities, which affects millions of people worldwide. Bracing and physiotherapy exercises represent the first-line, non-invasive approaches for managing scoliosis. In recent years, the use of wearable devices has spread as a novel approach to the treatment of scoliosis. However, their effectiveness in treatment planning and outcomes has not been thoroughly evaluated. This manuscript provides a scoping review of the classification and application of wearable devices and the role of artificial intelligence (AI) in interpreting the data collected by wearable devices and guiding the treatment. A systematic search was carried out on Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, and EMBASE for studies published between January 2020 and February 2025. A total of 269 studies were screened, and 88 articles were reviewed in depth. Inclusion criteria encompassed articles focusing on wearable devices integrated into smart braces, rehabilitation systems for scoliosis management, AI and machine-learning (ML) applications in scoliosis treatment, virtual reality (VR), and telemedicine for scoliosis care. The literature shows that the use of wearable devices can enhance scoliosis treatment by improving the efficiency of braces and enabling remote monitoring in rehabilitation programs. However, more research is needed to evaluate user compliance, long-term effectiveness, and the need for personalized interventions. Future advancements in artificial intelligence, microsensor technology, and data analytics may enhance the efficacy of these devices, which can lead to more personalized and accessible scoliosis 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.
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) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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 it