ArticleCureus2024
Using Immersive Virtual Reality to Classify Pediatric Thoracolumbar Spine Injuries.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective This study aimed to assess the reliability and reproducibility of the AO Spine Thoracolumbar Injury Classification System by using virtual reality (VR). We hypothesized that VR is a highly reliable and reproducible method to classify traumatic spine injuries. Methods VR 3D models were created from CT scans of 26 pediatric patients with thoracolumbar spine injuries. Seven orthopedic trainees were educated on the VR platform and AO Spine Thoracolumbar Injury Classification System. Classifications were summarized by primary class and subclass for both rater readings performed two weeks apart with image order randomized. Intra-observer reproducibility was quantified by Fleiss's kappa (kF) for primary classifications and Krippendorff's alpha (aK) for subclassifications along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each rater and across all raters. Inter-observer reliability was quantified by kF for primary classifications and aK for subclassifications along with 95% CIs across all raters for the first read, the second read, and all reads combined. The interpretations were as follows: 0-0.2: slight; 0.2-0.4: fair; 0.4-0.6: moderate; 0.6-0.8: substantial; and >0.8: almost perfect agreement. Results A total of 364 classifications were submitted by seven raters. Intra-observer reproducibility ranged from moderate (kF=0.55) to almost perfect (kF=0.94) for primary classifications and from substantial (aK=0.68) to almost perfect (aK=0.91) for subclassifications. Reproducibility was substantial across all raters for the primary class (kF=0.71; 95% CI=0.61-9.82) and subclass (aK=0.79; 95% CI=0.69-0.86). Inter-observer reliability was substantial (kF=0.63; 95% CI=0.57-0.69) for the first read, moderate (kF=0.58; 95% CI=0.52-0.64) for the second read, and substantial (kF=0.61; 95% CI=0.56-0.65) for all reads for primary classifications. For subclassifications, inter-observer reliability was substantial (aK=0.74; 95% CI=0.58-0.83) for the first read, second read (aK=0.70; 95% CI=0.53-0.80), and all reads (aK=0.72; 95% CI=0.60-0.79). Conclusions Based on our findings, VR is a reliable and reproducible method for the classification of pediatric spine trauma, besides its ability to function as an educational tool for trainees. Further research is needed to evaluate its application for other spine conditions.
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.