ReviewWorld journal of orthopedics2020
Screening for scoliosis - New recommendations, old dilemmas, no straight solutions.
Review in World journal of orthopedics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- A comprehensive narrative review of scoliosis in children and adolescents: epidemiology, screening strategies, therapeutic interventions, and biomechanical research.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Pooled it
- Distribution of scoliosis in 2.22 million adolescents in mainland China: A population-wide analysis.Journal of global health · 2024Pooled it
- Primary care and idiopathic scoliosis: an evaluation of family physicians' roles.European journal of pediatrics · 2026Article
- Risk of Scoliosis in Adolescent Female Rhythmic Gymnasts Compared with Healthy Peers: A Cross-Sectional Study Using the Scoliosis Tele-Screening Test.Sports health · 2026Article
- Barriers to early detection: the impact of healthcare access and screening on conservative treatment opportunities in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.Spine deformity · 2026Article
- Radiation-free 3D assessment of back height differences via three-dimensional depth sensing in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: prospective, single-center, observational study.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 · 2026Observational
- Assessing Public Awareness and Social Acceptance of Scoliosis Screening and Treatment Options in Saudi Arabia: A Nationwide Cross-Sectional Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
- Bracing and non-surgical management of scoliosis in Canada: Early detection, access inequities, and the need for interdisciplinary reform.Canadian prosthetics & orthotics journal · 2025Article
- Gender matters, especially if you are a Polish teenager being examined by a doctor or a doctor examining a teenager.European journal of pediatrics · 2024Review
- Early-onset scoliosis in children aged 4-7 years in Nanjing, China: A cross-sectional study.Health care science · 2024Article
- Perioperative use of immersive head-mounted virtual reality display enhances patient satisfaction in great saphenous vein surgery: a single-center clinical observation study.American journal of translational research · 2024Article
- The role of school medicine in the early detection and management of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.Wiener klinische Wochenschrift · 2023Article
- No Recommendation Is (at Least Presently) the Best Recommendation: An Updating Quality Appraisal of Recommendations on Screening for Scoliosis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Three-dimensional corrective exercise therapy for idiopathic scoliosis: study protocol for a prospective non-randomized trial.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This opinion review considers the prevailing question of whether to screen or not to screen for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. New and improved standards of people-oriented care and person-centredness, as well as improved principles of preventive screening and guideline development, have been postulated and implemented in health care systems and cultures. Recommendations addressing screening for scoliosis differ substantially, in terms of their content, standards of development and screening principles. Some countries have discontinued issuing recommendations. In the last decade, a number of updated and new recommendations and statements have been released. Systematically developed guidelines and recommendations are confronted by consensus and opinion-based statements. The dilemmas and discrepancies prevail. The arguments concentrate on the issues of the need for early detection through screening in terms of the effectiveness of early treatment, on costs and cost-effectiveness issues, scientific and epidemiologic value of screenings, and the credibility of the sources of evidence. The problem matter is of global scale and applies to millions of people. It regards clinical and methodological dilemmas, but also the matter of vulnerable and fragile time of adolescence and, more generally, children's rights. The decisions need to integrate people's values and preferences - screening tests need to be acceptable to the population, and treatments need to be acceptable for patients. Therefore we present one more crucial, but underrepresented in the discussion, issue of understanding and implementation of the contemporary principles of person-centred care, standards of preventive screening, and guideline development, in the context of screening for scoliosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.