Estimation of Transverse Plane Pelvic Rotation Using a Posterior-Anterior Radiograph
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Experimental and analytical study of transverse plane pelvic rotation. OBJECTIVES: To determine how pelvic rotation projected onto the transverse plane relates to coronal plane anatomic landmark location. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Current spine deformity instrumentation may be used to apply transverse plane loads to the spine that may be transmitted to regions not included in the instrumentation, including the pelvis. METHODS: An anatomically correct, sawbones model of an adult female pelvis was marked with lead shot at prominent radiographic landmarks, rotated at different angles in the sagittal, transverse, and coronal planes, and left/right (L/R) ratios of the medial-lateral distances between similar landmarks determined. An analytical equation was also derived to determine the degree of rotation in the transverse plane, using medial-lateral and anterior-posterior distances between same landmarks. RESULTS: The L/R ratio for the coronal plane distance between the inferior ilium at the sacro iliac joint (SI) and anterior superior iliac spine (ASIS), the SI-ASIS measurement, proved the most reliable of the four ratios studied to determine the extent of pelvic rotation in the transverse plane. Assuming the pelvis is symmetric, the most important factor is location of the compared landmarks. A long distance between the landmarks in both the coronal and transverse plane and a large angle between the line joining the two landmarks and the coronal plane of the pelvis, as viewed in the transverse plane, are best. Transverse plane pelvic rotation up to 20 degrees is accurately reflected nearly linearly by L/R SI-ASIS ratios. CONCLUSIONS: Bony pelvis landmarks visible on coronal plane radiographs can be used to estimate transverse plane pelvic rotation, but precise conversion to degrees rotation requires additional information on specific patient pelvic morphology.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".