ArticleSpine surgery and related research2023
Impact of Obesity, Osteopenia, and Scoliosis on Interobserver Reliability of Measures of the Spinopelvic Sagittal Radiographic Parameters.
Article in Spine surgery and related research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patterns of sitting spinal alignment in non-ambulatory scoliosis patients with paraplegia: an 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 · 2025Observational
- Inadequate Annotation and Its Impact on Pelvic Tilt Measurement in Clinical Practice.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: We investigated the relationships between patient factors, including obesity, osteopenia, and scoliosis, and the reliability of measures of the spinopelvic sagittal parameters using conventional X-radiography (Xp) and slot-scanning Xp devices (EOS) and examined the differences in interobserver measurement reliability between them. Methods: We retrospectively enrolled 55 patients (52.7±25.3 years, 27 females) with conventional whole-spine Xp and EOS images taken within three months. Patients were classified according to obesity (Body mass index≥25 kg/m Results: All parameters measured with EOS showed excellent reliability except for L4-S (ICC:.760, 95% CI:.295-.927) in the obesity+ group. All parameters measured with conventional Xp were excellent except for those classified as good: L4-S (.608,.093-.868) and pelvic incidence (PI) (.512,.078-.832) in the obese+ group; T1 slope (.781,.237-.952), L4-S (.718,.112-.936), sacral slope (SS) (.792,.237-.955), pelvic tilt (PT) (.787,.300-.952), and center of acoustic meatus and femoral head offset (CAM-HA) (.690,.090-.928) in the osteopenia+ group; and lumbar lordosis (LL, L4-S) (.712,.349-.889), SS (.608,.178-.843), and CAM-HA (.781,.480-.917) in the scoliosis+ group. Conclusions: Reliability of EOS measurements was preferable except for L4-S in patients with obesity. The reliability of conventional Xp measurements of pelvic parameters SS, PT, and PI was affected by patient factors, including obesity, osteopenia, and scoliosis. When evaluating lower lumbar and pelvic parameters in patients with these factors, we recommend substituting thoracic parameters, LL (L1-S), sagittal vertical axis (SVA), and T1 pelvic angle (TPA), or combining computed tomography (CT) measurements.
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.