ArticleSpine deformity2024
Predicting early return to the operating room in early-onset scoliosis patients using machine learning techniques.
Article in Spine deformity, 2024. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Deep learning based vertebra localization and Cobb angle estimation using x-ray images.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 · 2026Article
- Evaluation of a Pediatric Surgical Risk Calculator for Postoperative Outcomes in Spinal Deformity.Global spine journal · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence in early onset scoliosis: a scoping review.Spine deformity · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeSurgical treatment of early-onset scoliosis (EOS) is associated with high rates of complications, often requiring unplanned return to the operating room (UPROR). The aim of this study was to create and validate a machine learning model to predict which EOS patients will go on to require an UPROR during their treatment course.
methodsA retrospective review was performed of all surgical EOS patients with at least 2 years follow-up. Patients were stratified based on whether they had experienced an UPROR. Ten machine learning algorithms were trained using tenfold cross-validation on an independent training set of patients. Model performance was evaluated on a separate testing set via their area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Relative feature importance was calculated for the top-performing model.
results257 patients were included in the study. 146 patients experienced at least one UPROR (57%). Five factors were identified as significant and included in model training: age at initial surgery, EOS etiology, initial construct type, and weight and height at initial surgery. The Gaussian naïve Bayes model demonstrated the best performance on the testing set (AUC: 0.79). Significant protective factors against experiencing an UPROR were weight at initial surgery, idiopathic etiology, initial definitive fusion construct, and height at initial surgery.
conclusionsThe Gaussian naïve Bayes machine learning algorithm demonstrated the best performance for predicting UPROR in EOS patients. Heavier, taller, idiopathic patients with initial definitive fusion constructs experienced UPROR less frequently. This model can be used to better quantify risk, optimize patient factors, and choose surgical constructs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic: III.
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.