MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6992478690

Les Items Scoliose (un nouveau questionnaire fonctionnel spécifique de la scoliose)

2008· other· fr· W6992478690 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpenGrey (Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique) · 2008
Typeother
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicScoliosis diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScoliosisCorrective surgeryCongenital diseaseIdiopathic scoliosisPopulation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans la littérature, les études fonctionnelles réalisées chez les patients scoliotiques ont jusqu'ici utilisé des questionnaires génériques de qualité de vie. Mis au point en 1999 en anglais, le SRS 22 de la Scoliosis Research Society est spécifique de la scoliose mais n'est pas validé en français. En 2006, le Groupe d Etude des Scolioses a réalisé une enquête auprès de patients scoliotiques opérés dix ans avant, qui relevait des données socioprofessionnelles, cliniques, radiologiques et proposait les questionnaires Items Scoliose, Quebec Back Pain, le Fear Avoidance Belief Questionnaire et le Pain Drawing. Ces patients sont douloureux mais leur vie quotidienne et leur travail sont en moyenne peu altérés par les douleurs et la scoliose. Les Items Scoliose, nouveau questionnaire français spécifique de la scoliose, relève également une fatigue, une altération de l image de soi et des ressentis proprioceptifs péjoratifs. Ceux-ci sont influencés par la flèche cervicale, la gîte sagittale C7-bord antérieur du sacrum, et la lordose lombaire. Ce questionnaire apporte donc des informations nouvelles, mais demande une étude de validité complémentaire.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpenGrey (Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique)Same topicScoliosis diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207