ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2026
AI model for automatic spinopelvic and spinal alignment parameters measurement from EOS.
Article in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 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.
- Algorithmic fairness reporting in artificial intelligence for spinal deformity: a systematic review.Spine deformity · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the reliability of spinopelvic and spinal alignment parameters measurements generated by Gleamer BoneMetrics® artificial intelligence (AI) tool on full-spine EOS® exams. MATERIALS AND
methodsConsecutive full-spine EOS® radiographs were retrospectively evaluated to extract a total of 12 spinopelvic and spinal alignment parameters, including Cobb angle, thoracic kyphosis, lumbar lordosis, pelvic incidence, sacral slope, pelvic tilt, sagittal vertical axis (SVA), and spino-sacral angle automatically obtained by Gleamer BoneMetrics®. Each parameter was manually measured by a final-year radiology resident, blinded to AI results. The first 100 cases were reviewed jointly with a senior musculoskeletal radiologist; remaining doubtful cases were resolved by consensus. Agreement was assessed using Bland–Altman analysis, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC[3,1] and ICC[A,1]), Pearson’s correlation, root-mean-square error (RMSE), and predefined clinical thresholds (± 2°/±3 mm and ± 5°/±5 mm).
resultsTwo-hundred exams were analyzed (mean age 27.3 ± 21.8 years; 69.5% females). For most parameters (n = 200; Cobb angle n = 174), Gleamer and radiologist measurements showed excellent agreement: Pearson’s r = 0.92–0.99 (all p < 0.001), ICCs = 0.912–0.997, with small biases (median 0.65, maximum 1.4). RMSE ranged 0.7–5.0. Bland–Altman plots showed centered biases and symmetric limits of agreement. Significant heteroscedasticity was detected for some pelvic and coronal parameters. Clinical threshold concordance was high: 39.5–99.5% within ± 2° and 75–100% within ± 5° for angular measures, and 81–98% within ± 3 mm and 93.5–99.5% within ± 5 mm for linear measures.
conclusionGleamer BoneMetrics can generate reliable and accurate spinopelvic and spinal alignment parameters from EOS®.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41974957What 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.