ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2026
Morphological changes of the cervical spine in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis and correlation analysis.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundTo investigate the morphological changes of the cervical spine in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) and to analyze their correlation with other coronal and sagittal plane parameters of the spine.
methodsFull-length standing spinal radiographs were retrospectively collected from 199 patients with AIS and 77 adolescents without scoliosis who underwent evaluation at the Third Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang Chinese Medical University between January 2019 and February 2025. Patients with AIS were classified into two groups based on the physiological curvature of their cervical spine: a non-kyphotic group and a cervical kyphosis (CK) group. The following radiographic parameters were measured: coronal main curve Cobb angle, C2-C7 angle, T1 slope (T1S), T1 coronal tilt, apical vertebra translation (AVT), thoracic kyphosis (TK), lumbar lordosis (LL), sacral slope (SS), pelvic tilt (PT), pelvic incidence (PI), cervical sagittal vertical axis (CSVA), and sagittal vertical axis (SVA). Intergroup comparisons and correlation analyses of these parameters were subsequently performed.
resultsThe incidence of CK among patients with AIS was 60.3%, which was significantly higher than the 46.8% observed in the control group. Compared to patients with mild scoliosis, those with moderate scoliosis exhibited a significant reduction in the C2-C7 angle (P < 0.05), while the CSVA showed a significant increase (P < 0.05). No significant differences were observed in the C2-C7 angle, CSVA, or CK rates among the lumbar, thoracolumbar, and thoracic main curve groups (P > 0.05). In the thoracic main curve group, patients with a left convex curve had a significantly lower rate of CK compared to those with a right convex curve (P = 0.039). Correlation analysis revealed that C2-C7 angle was positively correlated with T1S (r = 0.628, P < 0.001) and TK (r = 0.552, P < 0.001), and negatively correlated with Cobb angle (r = -0.232, P < 0.001) and PT(r = -0.170, P = 0.016), CK was positively correlated with the Cobb angle (r = 0.289, P < 0.001), PT (r = 0.173, P = 0.015), while it showed a negative correlation with TK (r = -0.460, P < 0.001) and T1S (r = -0.518, P < 0.001).
conclusionCervical kyphosis is a prevalent morphological change observed in patients with AIS, and is correlated with spinopelvic parameters including the Cobb angle, PT, TK, and T1S. Logistic regression analysis identified Cobb angle and T1S as independent predictors of CK.
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.