Long-term Follow-up of Surgically Treated AIS Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to determine the long-term changes in spine and trunk alignment in patients who have undergone scoliosis surgery. Twenty-three (16F; 7M; at age of surgery 15.7 +/- 4.9 years) patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis agreed to participate and had posterior-anterior radiographs and surface topography prior to derotation surgery, within 6 months of surgery, at 2 years post-operatively and 5-10 years (mean follow-up period 6.11 +/- 1.6 years) after surgery. Cobb angles, surface trunk rotations, and cosmetic scores were measured at each visit. A questionnaire assessed back appearance and pain at the 5-10 year follow-up. The results of the questionnaire were compared to 25 patients with idiopathic scoliosis who had recently undergone surgery. A paired two-tailed Student's t-test with p=0.05 was used to compare the deformity between visits. The Cobb angle and cosmetic score improved after surgery while the change in trunk rotation was insignificant (p=0.37). Between the two-year and 5-10 year review, the Cobb angle, cosmetic score, and surface trunk rotation significantly increased. Self-perception of appearance and pain were similar to the control group. Surgical correction of scoliosis is not completely maintained during adulthood although the radiographic and surface deterioration does not appear to be clinically significant.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".