ArticlePloS one2025
Generation of severely scoliotic subject-specific musculoskeletal models.
Article in PloS one, 2025. 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.
- Reproducible Research: Computational Design of Personalized Clinical Treatments for Walking Impairments Using the Neuromusculoskeletal Modeling Pipeline.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Surgical correction of severe scoliosis has been associated with high rates of complications and reoperation rates. Patient outcomes could be improved with the use of personalised scoliotic spine models. To be clinically applicable, these models must be robust to operator variability, must accurately reflect the patient anatomy, and be rapidly generated. This study developed a semi-automatic pipeline for creating subject-specific models, and the inter- and intra-operator variability and model accuracy were assessed. An existing generic spine model was modified and morphed into a subject-specific spine model using manually performed virtual anatomical landmark palpations through a semi-automatic pipeline. The inter- and intra-operator variability of the virtual palpations was assessed, and the model was compared to the ground truth of a radiographic evaluation and segmentation of computed tomography data. The interclass correlation coefficient showed excellent inter- and intra-operator repeatability (>0.9). Although significant differences were found, they were not associated with specific anatomical landmarks. The mean inter- and intra-operator variability of the virtually palpated anatomical landmarks was 2 mm, and the maximum was 10.3 mm. The vertebral centres of the patient-specific model had maximum median errors of 10.3 mm. While the mean curvature of the model reflected the radiographic measurements, there were substantial deviations from the mean. The semi-automatic pipeline successfully created a subject-specific scoliotic spine model that included automatically adjusted muscle paths. The results indicated the process was robust to inter- and intra-operator variability but would benefit from full automation, particularly to improve the definition of the intervertebral joint.
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.