ArticleSpine deformity2024
Segmental deformity markers offer novel indicators of deformity progression risk in deformity-matched adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- An Innovative Stepwise C-Means Clustering Approach for Classification of Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis.Orthopaedic surgery · 2025Article
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
purposeIdentification of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) patients with mild curvatures who pose significant risk of progressing to severe levels of curvatures is of paramount importance for clinical care. This study aimed to compare segmental deformity changes in AIS sub-cohorts that are dichotomised by progression status.
methodsThirty-six female participants with Lenke 1 AIS curves were investigated with sequential MRIs during growth. Scans were reformatted to measure orthogonal segmental parameters, including sagittal/coronal wedging angles and axial rotation angles. Participants were dichotomised by progression. Two-tailed, independent sample t-tests were used to compare sub-cohort multi-segmental and segmental deformity parameters. Measurements were compared at each scan number and variable rates of change were determined using actual time between measures.
resultsAIS progression status sub-cohorts were comparable at scan 1 for multi-segmental deformity parameters (e.g. major thoracic curve angle, rib hump, kyphosis) (P > 0.05). However, apical measures of coronal IVD wedging, axial IVD rotation and axial vertebral rotation were segmental parameters at scan 1 which were larger for participants whose AIS would later go on to clinically progress (all P < 0.05). Measures of segmental hypokyphosis were comparable between groups. As development was tracked at each subsequent scan, coronal and axial plane differences between groups increased in both magnitude and number of differences.
conclusionInitial disparity and then subsequent increasing magnitude of change of axial rotation may indicate a higher propensity to clinically progress in the future. This knowledge hopes to provide useful management information for AIS care providers and prognostic education for patients alike. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.
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.