↓ Skip to main content

State of the art of current 3-D scoliosis classifications: a systematic review from a clinical perspective

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
State of the art of current 3-D scoliosis classifications: a systematic review from a clinical perspective
Published in
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12984-015-0083-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sabrina Donzelli, Salvatore Poma, Luca Balzarini, Alberto Borboni, Stefano Respizzi, Jorge Hugo Villafane, Fabio Zaina, Stefano Negrini

Abstract

Scoliosis is a complex three dimensional (3D) deformity: the current lack of a 3D classification could hide something fundamental for scoliosis prognosis and treatment. A clear picture of the actually existing 3D classifications lacks. The aim of this systematic review was to identify all the 3D classification systems proposed until now in the literature with the aim to identify similarities and differences mainly in a clinical perspective.After a MEDLINE Data Base review, done in November 2013 using the search terms "Scoliosis/classification" [Mesh] and "scoliosis/classification and Imaging, three dimensional" [Mesh], 8 papers were included with a total of 1164 scoliosis patients, 23 hyperkyphosis and 25 controls, aged between 8 and 20 years, with curves from 10° to 81° Cobb, and various curve patterns. Six studies looked at the whole 3D spine and found classificatory parameters according to planes, angles and rotations, including: Plane of Maximal Curvature (PMC), Best Fit Plane, Cobb angles in bodily plane and PMC, Axial rotation of the apical vertebra and of the PMC, and geometric 3D torsion. Two studies used the regional (spinal) Top View of the spine and found classificatory parameters according to its geometrical properties (area, direction and barycenter) including: Ratio of the frontal and the sagittal size, Phase, Directions (total, thoracic and lumbar), and Shift. It was possible to find similarities among 10 out of the 16 the sub-groups identified by different authors with different methods in different populations.In summation, the state of the art of 3D classification systems include 8 studies which showed some comparability, even though of low level. The most useful one in clinical everyday practice, is far from being defined. More than 20 years passed since the definition of the third dimension of the scoliosis deformity, now the time has come for clinicians and bioengineers to start some real clinical application, and develop means to make this approach an everyday tool.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 2 4%
Italy 1 2%
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 52 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 20%
Other 10 18%
Student > Master 10 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 16%
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 3 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 46%
Engineering 11 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 9%
Computer Science 1 2%
Sports and Recreations 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 10 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 October 2015.
All research outputs
#11,929,155
of 13,453,898 outputs
Outputs from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#673
of 771 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#296,190
of 360,357 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#48
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,453,898 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 771 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 360,357 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.