ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2025
A novel portable and radiation-free method for assessing scoliosis: an accurate and reproducible study.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2025. 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.
- Current Trends and Future Directions in the Diagnosis and Management of Pediatric Orthopedic Disorders.Cureus · 2026Review
- Congenital Scoliosis: A Comprehensive Review of Diagnosis, Management, and Surgical Decision-Making in Pediatric Spinal Deformity-An Expanded Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Prevalence and associated factors of multi-ethnic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis in Longlin, Southwestern China: a school-based cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to evaluate the accuracy and reproducibility of a newly developed portable and radiation-free three-dimensional spine sensing system (3D-SSS) for scoliosis assessment.
methodsA total of 145 patients underwent full-spine imaging using the EOS imaging system, and 3D-SSS data were collected between February 2023 and April 2023. A radiologist used sterEOS software to reconstruct the spine in 3D and obtain the Cobb angle. One radiologist and one orthopedist independently measured the patients using 3D-SSS, with the orthopedist performing two measurements per patient. The 3D-SSS post-processing system automatically generated the Cobb angle.
resultsThe mean Cobb angles obtained from EOS and 3D-SSS were 13.7 ± 9.9° (0.5∽45.7°) and 12.5 ± 8.6° (0.4∽40°), respectively. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for reliability between EOS and 3D-SSS was 0.921, indicating excellent agreement. Bland-Altman analysis revealed a bias of -1.171° between EOS and 3D-SSS, with only 10 patients outside the limits of agreement (-8.3∽6.0°). The root mean square error between EOS and 3D-SSS was 3.2°. A strong correlation was observed between the Cobb angles measured by EOS and 3D-SSS (r = 0.931, P < 0.001). The receiver operating characteristics curve showed that the diagnostic performance of 3D-SSS for scoliosis was 0.953 (P < 0.001). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of 3D-SSS for diagnosing scoliosis were 87.8%, 92.1%, 93.5%, and 85.3%, respectively. The intraobserver and interobserver ICCs for Cobb angles derived from 3D-SSS were 0.969 and 0.934, respectively, demonstrating excellent reproducibility.
conclusionsThe portable and radiation-free 3D-SSS accurately measured scoliosis and provided highly reproducible data. This system offers a novel method for clinicians to screen and monitor scoliosis in young patients.
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.