ArticleJournal of personalized medicine2023
Artificial Intelligence in Scoliosis Classification: An Investigation of Language-Based Models.
Article in Journal of personalized medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Large language models in neurosurgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Acta neurochirurgica · 2024Pooled it
- Examining the Role of Large Language Models in Orthopedics: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Pooled it
- Artificial Intelligence for Clinical Decision Support in Rural Spine Care: A Narrative Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Large Language Models Using Clinical Text in Pediatrics: A Scoping Review.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Deep learning based screening and regular assessment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis using wearable IMU sensors.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Article
- Assessing the accuracy and reproducibility of artificial intelligence-generated medical responses by ChatGPT on Scheuermann's kyphosis.Turkish journal of physical medicine and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Patient education strategies in pediatric orthopaedics: using ChatGPT to answer frequently asked questions on scoliosis.Spine deformity · 2025Article
- AI and machine learning in paediatric spine deformity surgery.Bone & joint open · 2025Article
- A 20-year research trend analysis of the artificial intelligence on scoliosis using bibliometric methods.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2025Review
- Evaluating the role of ChatGPT in rehabilitation medicine: a narrative review.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Review
- Qualitative metrics from the biomedical literature for evaluating large language models in clinical decision-making: a narrative review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2024Review
- Assessing the Accuracy of Artificial Intelligence Models in Scoliosis Classification and Suggested Therapeutic Approaches.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Medical Imaging: Analyzing the Performance of ChatGPT and Microsoft Bing in Scoliosis Detection and Cobb Angle Assessment.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Open-source artificial intelligence models are finding free application in various industries, including computer science and medicine. Their clinical potential, especially in assisting diagnosis and therapy, is the subject of increasingly intensive research. Due to the growing interest in AI for diagnostics, we conducted a study evaluating the abilities of AI models, including ChatGPT, Microsoft Bing, and Scholar AI, in classifying single-curve scoliosis based on radiological descriptions. Fifty-six posturographic images depicting single-curve scoliosis were selected and assessed by two independent neurosurgery specialists, who classified them as mild, moderate, or severe based on Cobb angles. Subsequently, descriptions were developed that accurately characterized the degree of spinal deformation, based on the measured values of Cobb angles. These descriptions were then provided to AI language models to assess their proficiency in diagnosing spinal pathologies. The artificial intelligence models conducted classification using the provided data. Our study also focused on identifying specific sources of information and criteria applied in their decision-making algorithms, aiming for a deeper understanding of the determinants influencing AI decision processes in scoliosis classification. The classification quality of the predictions was evaluated using performance evaluation metrics such as sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), accuracy, and balanced accuracy. Our study strongly supported our hypothesis, showing that among four AI models, ChatGPT 4 and Scholar AI Premium excelled in classifying single-curve scoliosis with perfect sensitivity and specificity. These models demonstrated unmatched rater concordance and excellent performance metrics. In comparing real and AI-generated scoliosis classifications, they showed impeccable precision in all posturographic images, indicating total accuracy (1.0, MAE = 0.0) and remarkable inter-rater agreement, with a perfect Fleiss' Kappa score. This was consistent across scoliosis cases with a Cobb's angle range of 11-92 degrees. Despite high accuracy in classification, each model used an incorrect angular range for the mild stage of scoliosis. Our findings highlight the immense potential of AI in analyzing medical data sets. However, the diversity in competencies of AI models indicates the need for their further development to more effectively meet specific needs in clinical practice.
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.