MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7038965672

L’impact de toutes les formes de scoliose de l’enfant sur sa qualité de vie à long terme, une revue systématique

2024· dissertation· en· W7038965672 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueHAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe) · 2024
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSubterranean biodiversity and taxonomy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScoliosisObservational studySpinal deformityQuality of life (healthcare)Idiopathic scoliosisHealth related quality of lifeQuality (philosophy)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background : Scoliosis is a spinal deformity over 10°. It is at the heart of public health issues because its idiopathic type concerns nearly 5% of teenagers. However, the children follow-up is often stopped when they stop growing up, without attention to its impact on his future quality of life. The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of children scoliosis, never mind its type, on its long-term quality of life with the help of questionnaires SF-36 and SRS-22. Method : Databases as Pubmed and Cochrane have been investigated since 06/11/2023 to 15/02/2024 . To be included, studies have to be observational and to analyze the quality of life of adults diagnosed with scoliosis during childhood compared to healthy controls. The selection, the analyze and the extraction of data have been made by the only author of this literature review. Results : 6 studies have been choose : 1 cohort, 4 cross-sectional and 1 case-control. The risk of bias have been evaluated by Newcastle-Ottawa Scale as weak to moderate. Results seem to show a diminution of quality of life in some of the fields. Discussion : Studies seem to be heterogeneous and biased. The Bradford-Hill criteria demonstrated a non-causal association between scoliosis and diminution of quality of life. GRADE system has shown a very weak proof level. The diagnosis of scoliosis during childhood seems to be non-causally associated to a lower quality of life. These results must be interpreted with carefulness regarding the low proof level of this literature review.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.005
Bibliometrics0.0110.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe)→Same topicSubterranean biodiversity and taxonomy→French-language works237,207→