Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27785476›Full record

ArticleScoliosis and spinal disorders2016

Retrospective analysis of idiopathic scoliosis medical records coming from one out-patient clinic for compatibility with Scoliosis Research Society criteria for brace treatment studies.

Krzysztof Korbel, Łukasz Stoliński, Mateusz Kozinoga, Tomasz Kotwicki

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scoliosis and spinal disorders, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 81% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Krzysztof KorbelRehasport Clinic, Górecka 30, Poznan, 60-476 Poland.
Łukasz StolińskiRehasport Clinic, Górecka 30, Poznan, 60-476 Poland.
Mateusz KozinogaRehasport Clinic, Górecka 30, Poznan, 60-476 Poland ; Spine Disorders and Pediatric Orthopaedics Department, University of Medical Sciences, Górecka 30, Poznan, 60-476 Poland.
Tomasz KotwickiSpine Disorders and Pediatric Orthopaedics Department, University of Medical Sciences, Górecka 30, Poznan, 60-476 Poland.
Poznan University of Medical Sciences · PLRehasport Clinic · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFirst author attempted to analyse medical records of patients with idiopathic scoliosis for compliance with the Scoliosis Research Society brace studies criteria. A retrospective analysis of medical records of 2705 girls treated from 1989 to 2002 was carried out.

methodsAge, Cobb, Risser and menarchal status were analyzed for compliance with the Scoliosis Research Society brace studies criteria: a) age ≥10 years, b) Risser 0-2, c) 25-40° Cobb angle, d) no earlier treatment, e) patients before first menses or not more than one year from first menses.

resultsIt has been found that 183 girls out of 2705 were ≥10 years old and in the range 25-40° Cobb angle. One hundred two out of 2705 patients revealed eligible for brace effectiveness study according to SRS 2005 criteria. 120 out of 2705 patients revealed eligible for brace brace effectiveness study according to SRS-SOSORT 2014 criteria.

conclusionThe excluded patients revealed too old or with too significant Cobb angles. This indicates the changing criteria for scoliosis brace treatment over the time. Direct comparison of current results of brace treatment with historical series of cases turns out to be very difficult.

Indexed as

Brace treatmentIdiopathic scoliosisSRS criteria

Identifiers

PMID27785476
PMCPMC5073407
OpenAlexW2539037954

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.