MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416438776 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2025-107478

Protocol for a virtual nominal group technique to develop expert consensus on graded return to sports, exercise and physical activity during intermediate and late-phase rehabilitation following spinal fusion in AIS

2025· article· en· W4416438776 on OpenAlexaff
Susanna Tucker, Nicola R Heneghan, Adrian Gardner, Alison Rushton, Emily Russell, Andrew Soundy

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDelphi Technique in Research
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProtocol (science)Presentation (obstetrics)Physical activityRehabilitationNominal group techniqueSports medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is a common paediatric spinal deformity with large curves surgically managed through spinal fusion. However, postoperative rehabilitation remains inconsistent and varies depending on clinician, hospital or location. Our international e-Delphi consensus established a broad range of statements from preoperative care until 12 months postoperatively. However, rehabilitation and graded return to sport between 3 and 12 months remains vague and further consensus work is needed. This study aims to understand the intermediate and late stages of rehabilitation in order to guide return to sport, exercise and physical activity. The primary objective is to explore content of rehabilitation and milestones between 3 and 12 months postoperatively. This understanding of postoperative care will form the basis for future postoperative guidance. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This protocol for a nominal group technique (NGT) study is written in accordance with the Accurate Consensus Reporting Document guidelines. A national sample of expert surgeons, physiotherapists and nurses in AIS will be recruited. The NGT will take place virtually and will consist of six stages: stage 1: idea generation; stage 2: round robin idea sharing; stage 3: discussion and clarification; stage 4: anonymous voting; stage 5: results feedback; and stage 6: discussion and final voting. This NGT will be preceded by a scoping review which will be disseminated a priori to inform stage 1 idea generation. The population, concept, context framework will be used to explore postoperative rehabilitation towards sports, exercise or physical activities following any kind of spinal surgery. The study steering group and patient and public involvement representative have been involved from conceptualisation and will continue to be involved until final dissemination. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The University of Birmingham has provided ethical approval: ERN_4201-Jun2025. Dissemination will take place through conference presentation and peer-reviewed publications.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.606
Threshold uncertainty score0.569

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.116
GPT teacher head0.537
Teacher spread0.421 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicDelphi Technique in ResearchFrench-language works237,207