Background: En bloc resection is recommended for the treatment of malignant and aggressive benign spinal tumors; however, it often requires a combined anterior-posterior approach, which is usually accompanied by longer surgical duration, increased blood loss, larger trauma, and surgical complexity. The present study describes a novel rotation-reversion technique for en bloc resection of the thoracic and upper lumbar spinal tumors using a posterior-only approach and evaluate its safety and efficacy. Methods: Thirteen patients with thoracic and upper lumbar (L1-L3) spinal tumors were treated with en bloc resection using the rotation-reversion technique through a posterior-only approach at our institution between 2015 and 2023. The clinical characteristics and surgical results of the patients were reviewed and analyzed. Results: Posterior-only en bloc resection was performed successfully in all 13 patients using the rotation-reversion technique, with a median follow-up of 30.4 months (range, 6–74 months). The average maximum size of these 13 tumors was 5.7 × 5.8 × 4.8 cm.The mean operation time and blood loss were 458.5 minutes (range, 220–880 minutes) and 3,146.2 mL (range, 1,000–6,000 mL), respectively, with 4 of the 13 patients (30.8%) experiencing perioperative complications. Negative margins were achieved in all the 13 patients (100%). One patient experienced local recurrence (7.7%) and 1 patient experienced instrumentation failures. Interbody fusion was confirmed in 11 of the 13 patients (84.6%), with a median fusion time of 6.9 months. All of the 13 patients experienced varying degrees of mild postoperative neurological deficits owing to resection of the nerve roots affected by tumor invasion of the vertebrae. No vessel injury or postoperative neurological paralysis occurred, except 1 patient who had been completely paralyzed before surgery. Conclusions The rotation-reversion technique is an effective procedure for en bloc resection of selected thoracic and upper lumbar spinal tumors through the posterior-only approach.

Background: Psychological test reports are essential in assessing intellectual functioning, aiding in diagnosing and treating intellectual disability (ID) and attention-deficit/ hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). However, these reports can have several problems because they are diverse, unstructured, subjective, and involve human errors. Additionally, physicians often do not read the entire report, and the number of reports is lower than that of diagnoses. Methods: We developed explainable predictive models for classifying IDs and ADHDs based on written reports to address these issues. The reports of 1,475 patients with IDs and ADHDs who underwent intelligence tests were used for the models. These models were developed by analyzing reports using natural language processing (NLP) and incorporating the physician’s diagnosis for each report. We selected n-gram features from the models’ results by extracting important features using SHapley Additive exPlanations and permutation importance to make the models explainable. Developing the n-gram feature-based original text search system compensated for the lack of human readability caused by NLP and enabled the reconstruction of human-readable texts from the selected n-gram features. Results: The maximum model accuracy was 0.92, and the 80 human-readable texts were restored from four models. Conclusion The results showed that the models could accurately classify IDs and ADHDs, even with a few reports. The models were also able to explain their predictions. The explainability-enhanced model can help physicians understand the classification process of IDs and ADHDs and provide evidence-based insights.

Background: Dementia is a multifaceted disorder that affects cognitive function, necessitating accurate diagnosis for effective management and treatment. Although the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) is widely used to assess cognitive impairment, its standalone efficacy is debated. This study examined the effectiveness of the MMSE alone versus in combination with other cognitive assessments in predicting dementia diagnosis, with the aim of refining the diagnostic accuracy for dementia. Methods: A total of 2,863 participants with subjective cognitive complaints who underwent comprehensive neuropsychological assessments were included. We developed two random forest models: one using only the MMSE and another incorporating additional cognitive tests.These models were evaluated based on their accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) on a 70:30 training-to-testing split. Results: The MMSE-alone model predicted dementia with an accuracy of 86% and AUC of 0.872. The expanded model demonstrated increased accuracy (88%) and an AUC of 0.934.Notably, 17.46% of the cases were reclassified from dementia to non-dementia category upon including additional tests. Higher educational level and younger age were associated with these shifts. Conclusion The findings suggest that although the MMSE is a valuable screening tool, it should not be used in isolation to determine dementia severity. The addition of diverse cognitive assessments can significantly enhance diagnostic precision, particularly in younger and more educated populations. Future diagnostic protocols should integrate multifaceted cognitive evaluations to reflect the complexity of dementia accurately.

Background: Psychological test reports are essential in assessing intellectual functioning, aiding in diagnosing and treating intellectual disability (ID) and attention-deficit/ hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). However, these reports can have several problems because they are diverse, unstructured, subjective, and involve human errors. Additionally, physicians often do not read the entire report, and the number of reports is lower than that of diagnoses. Methods: We developed explainable predictive models for classifying IDs and ADHDs based on written reports to address these issues. The reports of 1,475 patients with IDs and ADHDs who underwent intelligence tests were used for the models. These models were developed by analyzing reports using natural language processing (NLP) and incorporating the physician’s diagnosis for each report. We selected n-gram features from the models’ results by extracting important features using SHapley Additive exPlanations and permutation importance to make the models explainable. Developing the n-gram feature-based original text search system compensated for the lack of human readability caused by NLP and enabled the reconstruction of human-readable texts from the selected n-gram features. Results: The maximum model accuracy was 0.92, and the 80 human-readable texts were restored from four models. Conclusion The results showed that the models could accurately classify IDs and ADHDs, even with a few reports. The models were also able to explain their predictions. The explainability-enhanced model can help physicians understand the classification process of IDs and ADHDs and provide evidence-based insights.

Background: Dementia is a multifaceted disorder that affects cognitive function, necessitating accurate diagnosis for effective management and treatment. Although the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) is widely used to assess cognitive impairment, its standalone efficacy is debated. This study examined the effectiveness of the MMSE alone versus in combination with other cognitive assessments in predicting dementia diagnosis, with the aim of refining the diagnostic accuracy for dementia. Methods: A total of 2,863 participants with subjective cognitive complaints who underwent comprehensive neuropsychological assessments were included. We developed two random forest models: one using only the MMSE and another incorporating additional cognitive tests.These models were evaluated based on their accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) on a 70:30 training-to-testing split. Results: The MMSE-alone model predicted dementia with an accuracy of 86% and AUC of 0.872. The expanded model demonstrated increased accuracy (88%) and an AUC of 0.934.Notably, 17.46% of the cases were reclassified from dementia to non-dementia category upon including additional tests. Higher educational level and younger age were associated with these shifts. Conclusion The findings suggest that although the MMSE is a valuable screening tool, it should not be used in isolation to determine dementia severity. The addition of diverse cognitive assessments can significantly enhance diagnostic precision, particularly in younger and more educated populations. Future diagnostic protocols should integrate multifaceted cognitive evaluations to reflect the complexity of dementia accurately.

Background: En bloc resection is recommended for the treatment of malignant and aggressive benign spinal tumors; however, it often requires a combined anterior-posterior approach, which is usually accompanied by longer surgical duration, increased blood loss, larger trauma, and surgical complexity. The present study describes a novel rotation-reversion technique for en bloc resection of the thoracic and upper lumbar spinal tumors using a posterior-only approach and evaluate its safety and efficacy. Methods: Thirteen patients with thoracic and upper lumbar (L1-L3) spinal tumors were treated with en bloc resection using the rotation-reversion technique through a posterior-only approach at our institution between 2015 and 2023. The clinical characteristics and surgical results of the patients were reviewed and analyzed. Results: Posterior-only en bloc resection was performed successfully in all 13 patients using the rotation-reversion technique, with a median follow-up of 30.4 months (range, 6–74 months). The average maximum size of these 13 tumors was 5.7 × 5.8 × 4.8 cm.The mean operation time and blood loss were 458.5 minutes (range, 220–880 minutes) and 3,146.2 mL (range, 1,000–6,000 mL), respectively, with 4 of the 13 patients (30.8%) experiencing perioperative complications. Negative margins were achieved in all the 13 patients (100%). One patient experienced local recurrence (7.7%) and 1 patient experienced instrumentation failures. Interbody fusion was confirmed in 11 of the 13 patients (84.6%), with a median fusion time of 6.9 months. All of the 13 patients experienced varying degrees of mild postoperative neurological deficits owing to resection of the nerve roots affected by tumor invasion of the vertebrae. No vessel injury or postoperative neurological paralysis occurred, except 1 patient who had been completely paralyzed before surgery. Conclusions The rotation-reversion technique is an effective procedure for en bloc resection of selected thoracic and upper lumbar spinal tumors through the posterior-only approach.

Background: En bloc resection is recommended for the treatment of malignant and aggressive benign spinal tumors; however, it often requires a combined anterior-posterior approach, which is usually accompanied by longer surgical duration, increased blood loss, larger trauma, and surgical complexity. The present study describes a novel rotation-reversion technique for en bloc resection of the thoracic and upper lumbar spinal tumors using a posterior-only approach and evaluate its safety and efficacy. Methods: Thirteen patients with thoracic and upper lumbar (L1-L3) spinal tumors were treated with en bloc resection using the rotation-reversion technique through a posterior-only approach at our institution between 2015 and 2023. The clinical characteristics and surgical results of the patients were reviewed and analyzed. Results: Posterior-only en bloc resection was performed successfully in all 13 patients using the rotation-reversion technique, with a median follow-up of 30.4 months (range, 6–74 months). The average maximum size of these 13 tumors was 5.7 × 5.8 × 4.8 cm.The mean operation time and blood loss were 458.5 minutes (range, 220–880 minutes) and 3,146.2 mL (range, 1,000–6,000 mL), respectively, with 4 of the 13 patients (30.8%) experiencing perioperative complications. Negative margins were achieved in all the 13 patients (100%). One patient experienced local recurrence (7.7%) and 1 patient experienced instrumentation failures. Interbody fusion was confirmed in 11 of the 13 patients (84.6%), with a median fusion time of 6.9 months. All of the 13 patients experienced varying degrees of mild postoperative neurological deficits owing to resection of the nerve roots affected by tumor invasion of the vertebrae. No vessel injury or postoperative neurological paralysis occurred, except 1 patient who had been completely paralyzed before surgery. Conclusions The rotation-reversion technique is an effective procedure for en bloc resection of selected thoracic and upper lumbar spinal tumors through the posterior-only approach.

Background: Psychological test reports are essential in assessing intellectual functioning, aiding in diagnosing and treating intellectual disability (ID) and attention-deficit/ hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). However, these reports can have several problems because they are diverse, unstructured, subjective, and involve human errors. Additionally, physicians often do not read the entire report, and the number of reports is lower than that of diagnoses. Methods: We developed explainable predictive models for classifying IDs and ADHDs based on written reports to address these issues. The reports of 1,475 patients with IDs and ADHDs who underwent intelligence tests were used for the models. These models were developed by analyzing reports using natural language processing (NLP) and incorporating the physician’s diagnosis for each report. We selected n-gram features from the models’ results by extracting important features using SHapley Additive exPlanations and permutation importance to make the models explainable. Developing the n-gram feature-based original text search system compensated for the lack of human readability caused by NLP and enabled the reconstruction of human-readable texts from the selected n-gram features. Results: The maximum model accuracy was 0.92, and the 80 human-readable texts were restored from four models. Conclusion The results showed that the models could accurately classify IDs and ADHDs, even with a few reports. The models were also able to explain their predictions. The explainability-enhanced model can help physicians understand the classification process of IDs and ADHDs and provide evidence-based insights.

Background: Dementia is a multifaceted disorder that affects cognitive function, necessitating accurate diagnosis for effective management and treatment. Although the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) is widely used to assess cognitive impairment, its standalone efficacy is debated. This study examined the effectiveness of the MMSE alone versus in combination with other cognitive assessments in predicting dementia diagnosis, with the aim of refining the diagnostic accuracy for dementia. Methods: A total of 2,863 participants with subjective cognitive complaints who underwent comprehensive neuropsychological assessments were included. We developed two random forest models: one using only the MMSE and another incorporating additional cognitive tests.These models were evaluated based on their accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) on a 70:30 training-to-testing split. Results: The MMSE-alone model predicted dementia with an accuracy of 86% and AUC of 0.872. The expanded model demonstrated increased accuracy (88%) and an AUC of 0.934.Notably, 17.46% of the cases were reclassified from dementia to non-dementia category upon including additional tests. Higher educational level and younger age were associated with these shifts. Conclusion The findings suggest that although the MMSE is a valuable screening tool, it should not be used in isolation to determine dementia severity. The addition of diverse cognitive assessments can significantly enhance diagnostic precision, particularly in younger and more educated populations. Future diagnostic protocols should integrate multifaceted cognitive evaluations to reflect the complexity of dementia accurately.

Background: En bloc resection is recommended for the treatment of malignant and aggressive benign spinal tumors; however, it often requires a combined anterior-posterior approach, which is usually accompanied by longer surgical duration, increased blood loss, larger trauma, and surgical complexity. The present study describes a novel rotation-reversion technique for en bloc resection of the thoracic and upper lumbar spinal tumors using a posterior-only approach and evaluate its safety and efficacy. Methods: Thirteen patients with thoracic and upper lumbar (L1-L3) spinal tumors were treated with en bloc resection using the rotation-reversion technique through a posterior-only approach at our institution between 2015 and 2023. The clinical characteristics and surgical results of the patients were reviewed and analyzed. Results: Posterior-only en bloc resection was performed successfully in all 13 patients using the rotation-reversion technique, with a median follow-up of 30.4 months (range, 6–74 months). The average maximum size of these 13 tumors was 5.7 × 5.8 × 4.8 cm.The mean operation time and blood loss were 458.5 minutes (range, 220–880 minutes) and 3,146.2 mL (range, 1,000–6,000 mL), respectively, with 4 of the 13 patients (30.8%) experiencing perioperative complications. Negative margins were achieved in all the 13 patients (100%). One patient experienced local recurrence (7.7%) and 1 patient experienced instrumentation failures. Interbody fusion was confirmed in 11 of the 13 patients (84.6%), with a median fusion time of 6.9 months. All of the 13 patients experienced varying degrees of mild postoperative neurological deficits owing to resection of the nerve roots affected by tumor invasion of the vertebrae. No vessel injury or postoperative neurological paralysis occurred, except 1 patient who had been completely paralyzed before surgery. Conclusions The rotation-reversion technique is an effective procedure for en bloc resection of selected thoracic and upper lumbar spinal tumors through the posterior-only approach.