Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41732408›Full record

ArticleBrain & spine2026

Reassessing vertebral endplate references in parametric spinal analysis: Validation of a centroid-based method for vertebral inclination measurement.

Adimilson Dos Santos Delgado, Bruna Souza Morais, Helton Luiz Aparecido Defino, Paulo Miguel da Silva Pereira, Arlindo Neto Montagnoli

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brain & spine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Adimilson Dos Santos DelgadoInterunit Graduate Program in Bioengineering, Universidade de São Paulo (USP), São Carlos, SP, Brazil.
Bruna Souza MoraisInterunit Graduate Program in Bioengineering, Universidade de São Paulo (USP), São Carlos, SP, Brazil.
Helton Luiz Aparecido DefinoDepartment of Biomechanics, Medicine and Rehabilitation, Universidade de São Paulo (USP), Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil.
Paulo Miguel da Silva PereiraDepartamento de Neurociências Clínicas e Saúde Mental, Faculdade de Medicina (FMUP), Universidade do Porto., Serviço de Neurocirurgia, ULS, São João, Porto, Portugal.
Arlindo Neto MontagnoliElectrical Engineering Department, Universidade Federal de São Carlos (UFSCar), São Carlos, SP, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The vertebral endplate, the primary anatomical reference in spine measurements, is highly susceptible to observer variability. Alternatively, the geometric centroid model offers a more reproducible reference. This model is constructed by fitting a curve through geometric centroids derived from the four annotated vertices of each vertebral body. Research question: To introduce vertebral slope measurement using the normal to the centroid-based spinal model. Material and methods: Three evaluators annotated thirty-two standing lateral radiographs. Dedicated software computed geometric centroids, interpolated a mathematical spinal curve, and measured vertebral inclination relative to the curve's normal line. For comparison, vertebral slope was measured using the classical endplate-based method. Vertebral slope difference between adjacent vertebrae was also analyzed. Inter and intraobserver variability was evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). Paired t-tests were applied to compare methods at each vertebral level. Results: Vertebral slope reflects the absolute spatial orientation of each vertebra, and the vertebral slope difference captures local curvature. Mean intraobserver ICCs were 0.88 for the endplate method and 0.97 for the centroid method, while interobserver ICCs were 0.85 and 0.96, respectively. The centroid method demonstrated significantly lower variability in vertebral inclination across most levels (C4 to L4, Discussion and conclusion: Vertebral slope and vertebral slope difference offer an individualized analysis of the spine. Compared to the endplate method, the geometric centroid model substantially reduced observer variability. While the endplate proved suboptimal overall, the S1 endplate reference remains necessary due to sacral anatomy.

Indexed as

Sagittal alignmentSpinopelvic parametersVertebral inclinationVertebral slope

Identifiers

PMID41732408
PMCPMC12925294

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.