ArticleTurkish journal of physical medicine and rehabilitation2020
The rate of intraspinal problems and clinical evaluation of scoliosis: A cross-sectional, descriptive study.
Article in Turkish journal of physical medicine and rehabilitation, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Long-Term Management of Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis in Adulthood: Clinical Challenges and Progress During the Critical Period of Pregnancy.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Preoperative Evaluation of Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis: The Relevance of Routine Magnetic Resonance Imaging.Cureus · 2025Article
- Epidemiological and diagnostic characteristics of scoliosis in children in a single tertiary centre in Abidjan.African journal of paediatric surgery : AJPSArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aims to define the chronological, angular, and topographic classes in presumed idiopathic scoliosis and to investigate the frequency of generalized joint hypermobility, pain, neurological deficit, ankle deformity, Risser grade, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings in these patients. PATIENTS AND
methodsThis cross-sectional, descriptive study included a total of 36 patients (11 males, 25 females; mean age 13.4±4.6 years; range, 6 to 24 years) with idiopathic scoliosis between January 2015 and January 2019. Data including age, sex, complaint of pain, generalized joint hypermobility (based on Beighton score), neurological deficit, ankle deformity, and definition of scoliosis were recorded. Chronological, angular, and topographic classification were carried out. The Risser grade and MRI findings were noted.
resultsOf all patients, 30 (83.3%) were idiopathic, five (13.9%) were neuromuscular, and one (2.8%) was congenital scoliosis based on MRI findings. Of 13 (36.1%) spine MRI scans, six (46.2%) were intraspinal anomalies, four were syringomyelia (30.8%), one was Chiari type 1 malformation (7.7%), and one was hemivertebrae with diastematomyelia (7.7%). The highest rates of classes according to chronological, angular, and topographical classifications of idiopathic scoliosis were adolescent (17/30, 56.7%), low angular (24/30, 80.0%), and lumbar scoliosis (15/30, 50.0%), respectively. Ten patients (33.3%) complained of pain, while 23 patients (76.7%) had no neurological deficit and seven (23.3%) had hypoesthesia. Seventeen patients (56.7%) had generalized joint hypermobility.
conclusionIdiopathic scoliosis with non-severe spinal deformity may present with intraspinal neural axis abnormalities, even when it is neurologically intact. Based on our study results, it seems to be useful to consider whole spine MRI for the evaluation of thoracic and lumbar 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.