Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 913

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

AOSpine Thoracolumbar Spine Injury Classification System: Fracture Description, Neurological Status, and Key Modifiers

Vaccaro, Alexander R., Oner, Cumhur, Kepler, Christopher K., Dvorak, Marcel, Schnake, Klaus, Bellabarba, Carlo, Reinhold, Max, Aarabi, Bizhan, Kandziora, Frank, Chapman, Jens, Shanmuganathan, Rajasekaran, Fehlings, Michael, Vialle, Luiz·2013·Spine

Abstract

STUDY DESIGN: Reliability and agreement study, retrospective case series. OBJECTIVE: To develop a widely accepted, comprehensive yet simple classification system with clinically acceptable intra- and interobserver reliability for use in both clinical practice and research. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Although the Magerl classification and thoracolumbar injury classification system (TLICS) are both well-known schemes to describe thoracolumbar (TL) fractures, no TL injury classification system has achieved universal international adoption. This lack of consensus limits communication between clinicians and researchers complicating the study of these injuries and the development of treatment algorithms. METHODS: A simple and reproducible classification system of TL injuries was developed using a structured international consensus process. This classification system consists of a morphologic classification of the fracture, a grading system for the neurological status, and description of relevant patient-specific modifiers. Forty cases with a broad range of injuries were classified independently twice by group members 1 month apart and analyzed for classification reliability using the Kappa coefficient (κ). RESULTS: The morphologic classification is based on 3 main injury patterns: type A (compression), type B (tension band disruption), and type C (displacement/translation) injuries. Reliability in the identification of a morphologic injury type was substantial (κ= 0.72). CONCLUSION: The AOSpine TL injury classification system is clinically relevant according to the consensus agreement of our international team of spine trauma experts. Final evaluation data showed reasonable reliability and accuracy, but further clinical validation of the proposed system requires prospective observational data collection documenting use of the classification system, therapeutic decision making, and clinical follow-up evaluation by a large number of surgeons from different countries.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/brs.0b013e3182a8a381

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 8 references

Cited by

See all 913

Metadata

Authors
Vaccaro, A. R., Oner, C., Kepler, C. K., Dvorak, M., Schnake, K., Bellabarba, C., Reinhold, M., Aarabi, B., Kandziora, F., Chapman, J., Shanmuganathan, R., Fehlings, M., & Vialle, L.
Venue
Spine
Published
2013-11
Volume
38
Issue
23
Pages
2028-2037
ISSN
0362-2436 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2041474803
Cited by
913
References
8
FWCI
29.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: AOSpine Thoracolumbar Spine Injury Classification System: Fracture Description, Neurological Status, and Key Modifiers. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/brs.0b013e3182a8a381
The paper
Vaccaro, A. R., Oner, C., Kepler, C. K., Dvorak, M., Schnake, K., Bellabarba, C., Reinhold, M., Aarabi, B., Kandziora, F., Chapman, J., Shanmuganathan, R., Fehlings, M., & Vialle, L. (2013). AOSpine Thoracolumbar Spine Injury Classification System: Fracture Description, Neurological Status, and Key Modifiers. Spine. https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0b013e3182a8a381

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.