ArticleSpine deformity2025
Machine learning identifies clusters of the normal adolescent spine based on sagittal balance.
Article in Spine deformity, 2025. 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.
- AI in Pediatric Spine Care: Clinical, Research, and Ethical Considerations.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study applied a machine learning semi-supervised clustering approach to radiographs of adolescent sagittal spines from a single pediatric institution to identify patterns of sagittal alignment in the normal adolescent spine. We sought to explore the inherent variability found in adolescent sagittal alignment using machine learning to remove bias and determine whether clusters of sagittal alignment exist.
methodsMultiple semi-supervised machine learning clustering algorithms were applied to 111 normal adolescent sagittal spines. Sagittal parameters for resultant clusters were determined.
resultsMachine learning analysis found that the spines did cluster into distinct groups with an optimal number of clusters ranging from 3 to 5. We performed an analysis on both 3 and 5-cluster groups. The 3-cluster groups analysis found good consistency between methods with 96 of 111, while the analysis of 5-cluster groups found consistency with 105 of 111 spines. When assessing for differences in sagittal parameters between the groups for both analyses, there were differences in T4-12 TK, L1-S1 LL, SS, SVA, PI-LL mismatch, and TPA. However, the only parameter that was statistically different for all groups was SVA.
conclusionsBased on machine learning, the adolescent sagittal spine alignments do cluster into distinct groups. While there were distinguishing features with TK and LL, the most important parameter distinguishing these groups was SVA. Further studies may help to understand these findings in relation to spinal deformities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39167356What 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.