MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416209086 · doi:10.1302/1358-992x.2025.13.146

ASSESSING COBB ANGLE AGREEMENT IN COMMUNITY SPINE RADIOGRAPHS: CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE IN ADOLESCENT IDIOPATHIC SCOLIOSIS PATIENTS

2025· article· en· W4416209086 on OpenAlexaff
Dong‐Hyun Kim, Ameer Shaker Hadi, Andréa S. Doria, Akio Mitani, J. Dermott, Andrew Howard, David E. Lebel

Bibliographic record

VenueOrthopaedic Proceedings · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicScoliosis diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntraclass correlationCobb angleIdiopathic scoliosisCohen's kappaScoliosisCobBStatisticLogistic regression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Primary care physicians rely on community radiology reports to confirm an Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis (AIS) diagnosis prior to spine specialist referral. Accurate reporting of spine x-rays is essential as results guide management. While Cobb angle is known to have excellent reliability, this may be over-reported, specific to orthopaedic specialists and with some studies pre-determining end-vertebrae. The study objectives were 1) to determine the agreement of Cobb angle readings between index evaluation of community spine x-ray and re-evaluation of the same image by tertiary-care clinicians (spine specialist and pediatric radiologist) and 2) to determine if inaccurate measurements were associated with late AIS referrals, defined as those who present as likely surgical candidates on initial presentation. A review of AIS patients (n=170) seen for an initial visit at a tertiary-care pediatric hospital between January-September 2021 was conducted, excluding those seen for second opinion, missing index Cobb angle or with index imaging from the same institution. Community index spine x-rays available on the institution's PACS (n=119) were independently measured by two blinded raters (spine specialist and pediatric radiologist). The agreement in Cobb angle readings between community radiology and tertiary-care clinicians was measured using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and the agreement in the corresponding Scoliosis Research Society management categories was measured using Fleiss’ Kappa statistic (κ). Agreement statistics were calculated for evaluation of the reference standard 3-foot standing spine x-ray in the same cohort. Bland-Altman plots were constructed to compare raters on index image and reference standard. Logistic regression was used to estimate the odds of late referrals from the discrepancy in Cobb angle measurements between community radiology and reference standard when images were within 90 days (n=111). Discrepancies were defined as differences in Cobb angle measurements >5°. An adjusted model included age, imaging location, image quality and referring specialty. Most index x-rays (72.6%) were obtained at a private community clinic. The agreement in Cobb angle on the index x-ray between community radiologist and spine specialist was fair (ICC=0.78 95% CI 0.66-0.86, SEM=6.14°) with moderate agreement in corresponding management (κ=0.58). On the same image, the agreement between community radiologist and pediatric radiologist remains fair (ICC=0.74 95% CI 0.65-0.81, SEM=6.73°) though improved agreement in corresponding management (κ=0.65). Comparatively, the agreement between spine specialist and pediatric radiologist on both index and reference standard was excellent (ICC=0.96, 95% CI 0.89-0.98, SEM=2.57°; ICC=0.97, 95% CI 0.95-0.98, SEM=2.86°) with substantial agreement in corresponding management (κ=0.73; κ=0.71). The proportion of patients with discrepancies in Cobb angle measurements was 45.0% when comparing those with index images within 90 days of the reference standard. The proportion of patients who present late was 34.2%. The odds of late referral increased when there were inaccuracies in community measurements (OR = 3.55 95% CI 1.91-6.59). There are clinically important differences between community radiology and tertiary-care evaluation of spine x-rays. Inaccurate interpretation impacts timely referrals, contributing to missed opportunities for conservative treatment and increased surgical burden.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.313 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrthopaedic ProceedingsSame topicScoliosis diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207