ArticleSpine deformity2026
Radiation-free Cobb angle estimation in adolescent scoliosis using surface topography and a linear regression model.
Article in Spine deformity, 2026. 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.
- Three-Dimensional Surface Topography for the Assessment of Spinal Alignment: A Cross-Sectional Study of Biomechanical Correlates.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Scoliosis, the most common spinal deformity in adolescents, requires frequent radiographic follow-up, exposing patients to cumulative ionizing radiation with potential long-term risks. In response, recent efforts have explored radiation-free alternatives for Cobb angle estimation, but most fail to meet the clinical threshold of a minimum significant change of 5°. In this study, we aimed to develop and internally validate a fully automated method for predicting Cobb angle using 3D surface topography (ST) data and a linear regression model (LRM). Principal component analysis was used to reduce the dimensionality of the ST data, and several machine learning models were compared, including neural networks, XGBoost and Stacking. The LRM showed the best performance in the test set, with a mean absolute error (MAE) of 3.97°, a root Mean square error (RMSE) of 4.70°, and a strong correlation with the ground truth (r = 0.91). Residual analysis confirmed normality and homoscedasticity, supporting the robustness of the model. Importantly, the MAE fell below the clinically significant threshold of 5°, indicating the model's ability to detect minimal but critical changes in spinal curvature. These results outperform most previous non-radiographic methods and suggest that a simple, interpretable LRM, combined with open-source tools and ST data, offers a viable and scalable solution for non-invasive scoliosis monitoring. If externally validated, this method could reduce reliance on x-rays, thereby reducing radiation exposure while maintaining assessment accuracy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41620570What 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.