Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30617835›Full record

ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2019

Is rasterstereography a valid noninvasive method for the screening of juvenile and adolescent idiopathic scoliosis?

Tito Bassani, Elena Stucovitz, Fabio Galbusera, Marco Brayda-Bruno

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Meta-analysis of the validity and reliability of rasterstereographic measurements of spinal posture.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2020
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Frontiers in digital health · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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.

Tito BassaniLABS, Laboratory of Biological Structures Mechanics, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy. tito.bassani@grupposandonato.it.ORCID 0000-0003-3312-1565
Elena StucovitzLABS, Laboratory of Biological Structures Mechanics, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy.
Fabio GalbuseraLABS, Laboratory of Biological Structures Mechanics, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy.
Marco Brayda-BrunoIII Spine Surgery - Scoliosis Department, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy.

Funding

Ministero della Salute (IT) and Regione Lombardia (IT) PCC-2011-2353854
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeAim of the study was to verify the accuracy of rasterstereography (RST), as radiation-free alternative to plain radiography (RAD) in the monitoring of spine deformity and scoliosis progression in juvenile and adolescent subjects with idiopathic scoliosis.

methods192 subjects underwent RST (by Formetric 4D device) and low-dose RAD (EOS Imaging, France) in the same session. A sub-group of 30 subjects, selected for conservative treatment with corrective bracing, was assessed at 6-months follow-up. The Cobb angles (CA) obtained by the 3D spine reconstruction from RAD were compared with those provided by RST. Thoracic kyphosis (TK) and lumbar lordosis (LL) were compared as well.

resultsRST provided lower CA compared to RAD (15° vs. 33°, mean values). The average difference in measuring CA was 18°, and the correlation coefficient was 0.55. Comparable TK was observed, whereas LL resulted underestimated by RST compared to RAD (34° vs. 43°, average values). The within-subjects correlation, measuring the accuracy of RST in monitoring the scoliosis progression, was 0.3. Accuracy of RST in identifying increased or decreased CA was 67%. Sensitivity and specificity were 64% and 69%.

conclusionsRST demonstrated moderate accuracy in measuring the scoliosis degree and low accuracy in monitoring the curve progression. Accordingly, it cannot be considered as a valid alternative to radiographic evaluation. However, since demonstrated capable of revealing the presence of spine deformity, it could be in principle considered for the early screening in large adolescent populations, but after accounting for a cost-benefit analysis with respect to other traditional approaches. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Indexed as

PhotogrammetryAdolescentChildHumansImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedImaging, Three-DimensionalRadiographyRange of Motion, ArticularReproducibility of ResultsScoliosisAdolescentsFormetric 4DLow-dose radiographyRasterstereographyScoliosis

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.