Skip to content

What's New — Spine — October 2026

29 new articles published this month.

Themes: Degenerative Lumbar Surgery Decisions · Cervical Deformity and Arthroplasty · Spine Trauma and Fracture Care · Rib Fracture Stabilization Evidence · Alignment, Anatomy and Implants · Brachial Plexus Correspondence

Digest generated 2026-11-04 16:22:16+00:00.

Highlights

Degenerative Lumbar Surgery Decisions

This month's digest highlights refinement of decision-making in degenerative lumbar disease. In multilevel degenerative lumbar stenosis, sequential preoperative assessment with walking load testing and selective nerve root blocks meaningfully alters which levels ultimately undergo endoscopic decompression [2]. For L5, S1 disc herniation, meta-analytic evidence compares transforaminal with interlaminar endoscopic discectomy [25], while a separate systematic review addresses unilateral biportal endoscopy versus percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy for far lateral herniations [26]. Broader context is provided by a state-of-the-evidence review of endoscopic spine surgery in the United States, noting comparable outcomes to microscopic techniques but training and reimbursement barriers [6]. Finally, screening gaps persist: many patients undergoing lumbar fusion for stenosis with spondylolisthesis are not screened or treated for osteoporosis despite its impact on complications [3].

Cervical Deformity and Arthroplasty

Cervical spine topics span motion preservation, deformity, and alignment. A comprehensive review of cervical disc arthroplasty confirms outcomes comparable to ACDF with durable motion preservation, lower adjacent-segment pathology, and expanding indications including multilevel and hybrid constructs [5]. Adult cervical deformity evaluation now relies on standing full-spine radiographs with specific alignment targets and the morphology-based Kim-ISSG classification to guide surgical planning [7]. Complementing this, sagittal alignment in cervical fusion is strongly tied to patient-reported outcomes, with T1 slope-cervical lordosis mismatch and C2-C7 sagittal vertical axis correlating with disability; alignment-conscious planning should account for global spinopelvic balance [8]. Related work examines how corrective spinal alignment surgery influences range of motion after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty, underscoring cervicothoracic interplay [23].

Spine Trauma and Fracture Care

Traumatic spine injury receives substantial attention. Delayed flexion-extension radiographs after blunt cervical trauma remain diagnostically useful for detecting unstable ligamentous injuries in alert patients with normal initial imaging [13]. For thoracolumbar injuries, MRI changes management in a meaningful proportion of CT-defined AO Spine A/B fractures by characterizing the posterior ligamentous complex [18], and percutaneous fixation serves as safe definitive damage-control care for AO type B fractures in polytrauma patients [15]. A remote review protocol for non-operative thoracolumbar compression fractures safely reduced in-person consultations without complications [12]. Epidemiologic data from Ethiopia describe differences between single- and multi-level traumatic spinal fractures [14], and electric micromobility devices are driving escalating spine injury presentations [16]. Geriatric odontoid fracture management continues to show debated survival and quality-of-life trade-offs between surgical and conservative care [20].

Rib Fracture Stabilization Evidence

Several articles address surgical stabilisation of rib fractures (SSRF) within trauma care. A national TQIP analysis found SSRF associated with lower mortality among severe traumatic brain injury patients with flail chest, though not among non-TBI patients [19]. Paediatric practice appears to diverge from the adult trend, with SSRF performed rarely and at stable rates in children [21]. A prospective cohort study examined patient-centered outcomes after SSRF, adding patient-reported data to a field dominated by resource-utilisation endpoints [22]. Two accompanying commentaries frame the broader tension in trauma workup, moving from missed injury to overdiagnosis [29], and methodologic caution regarding SHAP machine-learning explanations, which explain model behaviour rather than establish statistical correlations [28].

Alignment, Anatomy and Implants

Anatomic and biomechanical themes round out the month. A detailed review covers sacral and lumbosacral junction anatomic variations, including sacral dysmorphism and Bertolotti syndrome, with direct implications for surgical planning and instrumentation [1]. Quantitative CT analysis links greater pelvic tilt to regional reductions in S1 trabecular bone mineral density, relevant to sacral insufficiency fracture risk and spinopelvic loading [17]. In adult spinal deformity, commentary explores whether T4-L1 pelvic angle normalization refines proportional alignment strategies and reduces mechanical complications after long-segment fusion [11]. Metal hypersensitivity following spinal implants is systematically reviewed, emphasizing its infection-mimicking presentation and limited diagnostic evidence [27]. Historical and health-system pieces include a presidential address on scoliosis care [24], value-based payment model evolution for spinal fusion [10], and a paediatric orthopaedic screening protocol correction [9].

Brachial Plexus Correspondence

A single correspondence item critiques a narrative review proposing that anatomic predisposition and inherent neurological vulnerability, analogous to neurogenic thoracic outlet syndrome, explain some obstetric brachial plexus injuries. The letter argues the nerve-fragility hypothesis remains unsubstantiated and raises concern that such reasoning could be misused in medicolegal contexts to contest causation when dystocia or traction is absent [4].

Articles by Theme

Degenerative Lumbar Surgery Decisions (5)

2. Long Y, Li L, Zhong Y, et al. Clinical decision-making for decompression-level selection in multilevel degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: a retrospective cohort study. International Orthopaedics 2026. doi:10.1007/s00264-026-07065-x

This retrospective cohort of 168 patients with multilevel degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis tracked how planned endoscopic decompression levels changed across sequential preoperative assessments, including walking load testing and selective nerve root block, over 24 months. The study characterized the frequency of level-selection changes and events at initially untreated candidate levels. Clinically, the findings inform a staged decision-making approach to selecting decompression levels in multilevel stenosis.

3. Mao E, Ceballos-Alvarez KE, Thai S, et al. Osteoporosis Screening Gaps Among Patients Undergoing Lumbar Fusion Surgery. Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons 2026. doi:10.5435/jaaos-d-26-00335

Using the TriNetX database, this study assessed dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) screening rates within 2 years before lumbar fusion among over 46,000 patients older than 50 years undergoing surgery for stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis, plus treatment rates after diagnosis. The key finding was that osteoporosis screening and treatment remain substantially inadequate despite elevated complication risk after fusion. Clinically, routine preoperative DEXA screening and treatment initiation should be prioritized in this population.

6. Kim MT, Lee S, Goh GS, et al. Endoscopic Spine Surgery: Evidence Maturity and the Path Forward in the United States. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 2026. doi:10.2106/jbjs.26.00630

This review evaluates the evidence maturity and adoption barriers for endoscopic spine surgery (ESS) in the United States, noting comparable outcomes to microscopic/tubular techniques for lumbar disc herniation and stenosis but a limited cervical and thoracic evidence base. U.S. adoption is constrained by a steep learning curve, limited training pathways, and reimbursement challenges, though ambulatory surgery center migration and value-based models may help. Clinically, broader integration requires standardised training, multi-institutional registries, and alignment with payment models such as the 2026 Medicare TEAM program.

25. Shi H, Sun X, Yang K, et al. Transforaminal versus interlaminar endoscopic lumbar discectomy for L5–S1 lumbar disc herniation: meta-analysis. EFORT Open Reviews 2026. doi:10.1530/eor-2025-0002

The authors performed a meta-analysis comparing transforaminal versus interlaminar endoscopic lumbar discectomy for L5, S1 disc herniation. Pooled results showed both approaches yield comparable clinical outcomes, with differences mainly in operative time, complication profiles, and recurrence. Approach selection can therefore be tailored to anatomy and surgeon expertise rather than one technique being universally superior.

26. Lin K, Yu X, Wang S, et al. Unilateral biportal endoscopy versus percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy for far lateral lumbar disc herniation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. EFORT Open Reviews 2026. doi:10.1530/eor-2026-0035

This systematic review and meta-analysis compared unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) with percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED) for far lateral lumbar disc herniation. UBE achieved similar pain relief and functional recovery but offered better visualization and comparable or lower complication and recurrence rates. Both minimally invasive options are effective, so the choice may hinge on surgeon experience and facility resources.

Cervical Deformity and Arthroplasty (4)

5. Kim MT, Lee S, Goh GS, et al. Cervical Disc Arthroplasty: Evolution, Evidence, and Future Directions in Motion-Preservation Surgery. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 2026. doi:10.2106/jbjs.26.00323

This review summarizes the evolution and evidence for cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA), showing outcomes comparable to ACDF for 1- and 2-level degenerative disc disease with durable motion preservation and modestly lower adjacent-segment pathology rates. It also highlights promising short- to intermediate-term results for expanded indications such as multilevel and hybrid constructs. Clinically, growing CDA use demands standardised failure reporting and evidence-based revision algorithms.

7. Dekhne MS, Kazarian GS, Kim HJ. Adult Cervical Deformity: Contemporary Evaluation, Classification, and Surgical Decision-Making. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 2026. doi:10.2106/jbjs.26.00473

This review outlines contemporary evaluation of adult cervical deformity, emphasizing standing full-spine radiographs and key alignment targets (cSVA ≤40 mm, T1S−CL <15°, CBVA −10° to +10°) linked to better patient-reported outcomes. The Kim-ISSG morphology-based classification (flat neck, focal, cervicothoracic, coronal/complex) offers a reproducible, reliable framework for operative planning. Clinically, surgical decisions should integrate flexibility, neurologic status, global alignment, bone quality, and patient-specific factors, though prospective validation of the classification's impact is needed.

8. Basques BA, Sadh P, Kim J, et al. Sagittal Alignment in Cervical Spine Fusion. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 2026. doi:10.2106/jbjs.26.00362

This review synthesizes evidence on sagittal alignment in cervical fusion, showing that greater T1 slope-cervical lordosis mismatch and larger C2-C7 sagittal vertical axis correlate with worse disability and quality of life. Cervical alignment must be interpreted in the context of global thoracic and spinopelvic balance and compensatory mechanisms. Clinically, alignment-conscious surgical planning tailored to deformity morphology and flexibility reduces postoperative imbalance and adjacent-segment disease risk.

23. Takayama K, Ito H. Effect of Corrective Spinal Alignment Surgery on Postoperative Range of Motion Following Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty. JSES Reviews, Reports, and Techniques 2026. doi:10.1016/j.xrrt.2026.100893

This study examined whether corrective spinal alignment surgery affects postoperative range of motion after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. Corrective spinal alignment surgery influenced postoperative shoulder range of motion outcomes following reverse arthroplasty, indicating that sagittal spinal deformity and its correction affect shoulder prosthetic function. Spinal alignment should be assessed and optimised when planning reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in patients with spinal deformity.

Spine Trauma and Fracture Care (7)

12. Nie J, Di Gerolamo J, Truong N, et al. Implementation of a thoracolumbar compression fracture remote review protocol safely reduces in-person spine consultations. Injury 2026. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2026.113500

This retrospective single-center study compared formal bedside spine consultations with a remote review protocol by an on-call spine resident for acute thoracolumbar compression fractures in 120 adult trauma patients. No TLCF-related neurological or brace-related complications occurred in either cohort, and time to discharge was similar between groups. Remote review appears safe for low-risk injuries and can reduce in-person spine consultations without compromising care.

13. EMIN L, LAFONT C, RAVAILLAULT S, et al. Diagnostic evaluation of delayed flexion-extension radiographs after blunt cervical spine trauma: A prospective study. Injury 2026. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2026.113502

This prospective single-center study evaluated a 20-year delayed flexion-extension radiography pathway for alert patients with persistent neck pain and normal initial imaging after blunt cervical spine trauma (n=303), alongside 24 surgically treated unstable ligamentous injuries. It assessed whether delayed dynamic radiographs detect surgically relevant instability missed on initial emergency assessment. The findings inform the ongoing debate about the diagnostic role of delayed dynamic imaging in clearing the cervical spine.

14. Mengistu MG, Yazdanpanah S, Damenu H, et al. Comparing the epidemiology and associations of single- versus multi-level traumatic spinal fractures at a tertiary referral hospital in Ethiopia. Injury 2026. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2026.113518

This study compared 85 single-level and 138 multi-level traumatic spinal fractures using a tertiary hospital registry in Ethiopia (2023-2026). Multi-level fractures were more often caused by blunt trauma and less by road-traffic accidents, and were associated with more severe neurological injury. The findings highlight injury-pattern differences relevant to trauma system planning and policy in low-resource settings.

15. Giorgi PD, Ramponi A, Legrenzi S, et al. Percutaneous fixation as definitive care for AO spine type B thoracolumbar fractures in polytrauma patients. Injury 2026. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2026.113503

This retrospective study of 43 polytrauma patients with 48 AO Spine Type B thoracolumbar fractures evaluated percutaneous pedicle screw fixation as definitive treatment, traditionally reserved for open posterior fusion. With a minimum 12-month follow-up, the study assessed operative, clinical, and radiological outcomes in this hemodynamically vulnerable population. The results support percutaneous stabilisation as a minimally invasive damage-control strategy enabling early mobilization in polytrauma patients.

16. Tannoury T, El-Hajj N, Dhunna DP, et al. Riding the shockwave: Escalating spine injuries from electric micromobility devices in the United States. Injury 2026. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2026.113525

This retrospective study analyzed National Electronic Injury Surveillance System data (2015-2024) to characterize longitudinal trends in spine injuries from electric scooters, bicycles, hoverboards, and skateboards. It documents escalating emergency department presentations of micromobility-related spinal injuries, which occur disproportionately compared with traditional bicycles due to device design and riding posture. Clinicians and policymakers should anticipate growing spine trauma caseloads and develop targeted prevention strategies as ridership expands.

18. Quilichini J, Dien E, Ranc P, et al. Impact of MRI on the management of CT-defined AO spine A/B thoracolumbar fractures. Injury 2026. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2026.113499

In 158 neurologically intact patients with AO Spine A/B thoracolumbar fractures, emergency MRI added to CT was evaluated for its effect on treatment decisions (conservative vs. minimally invasive vs. invasive). MRI detected more fractured vertebrae than CT and changed the treatment strategy in 19 patients, with predictors of management change identified. These findings support a selective, indication-driven use of MRI in thoracolumbar trauma, as it meaningfully alters management in a subset of patients.

20. Oberthür S, Singer A, Roch PJ, et al. Survival and quality of life after treatment of geriatric odontoid fractures. Injury 2026. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2026.113534

In 93 geriatric patients (mean age ~79) with odontoid fractures, mostly Type II, treated conservatively or surgically (2017-2020), survival and quality of life (VAS, NDI, SF-36) were assessed with Kaplan-Meier/Cox analyses. Surgical treatment reduced nonunion but did not clearly improve survival or patient-reported outcomes relative to conservative care in this comorbid population. Treatment decisions should be individualized, weighing fracture stability against surgical risk rather than assuming surgery improves survival or quality of life.

Rib Fracture Stabilization Evidence (5)

19. Nasef H, Chin B, Nunes N, et al. Surgical stabilization of rib fractures in adult trauma patients with flail chest with or without severe traumatic brain injury: A national analysis. Injury 2026. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2026.113602

Using the ACS-TQIP dataset (2017-2021), outcomes of surgical stabilisation of rib fractures (SSRF) versus non-operative management were compared in non-TBI patients with isolated flail chest and in severe TBI patients with flail chest. SSRF did not significantly reduce mortality in non-TBI patients but was associated with lower mortality in severe TBI patients, though it prolonged ICU length of stay in both groups. SSRF may be considered in flail chest patients with severe TBI, whereas its benefit in non-TBI patients remains uncertain.

21. Hamdan HS, Halabi M, Nouiri AE, et al. Surgical rib fixation in pediatric patients: Following the adult trend or a different story?. Injury 2026. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2026.113645

Among 28,465 paediatric rib fracture patients in TQIP (2017-2023), only 87 (0.31%) underwent surgical stabilisation of rib fractures (SSRF), with paediatric rates stable over time while adult SSRF use increased. Pediatric SSRF patients were older and more severely injured, with a high prevalence of flail chest, suggesting a distinct, highly selected indication profile. SSRF in children remains rare and should be reserved for severe injury patterns rather than extrapolated from adult practice trends.

22. Laredo J, Walker M, Wilson F, et al. Patient Centered Outcomes After Surgical Stabilization of Rib Fractures: A Prospective Cohort Study. Injury 2026. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2026.113743

This prospective cohort study evaluated patient-centered outcomes (pain, function, quality of life) after surgical stabilisation of rib fractures (SSRF). SSRF was associated with improvements in patient-reported pain and functional measures, extending beyond traditional endpoints such as mortality and ventilator days. These results support SSRF as a patient-relevant intervention and highlight the value of incorporating patient-reported outcome measures in rib fracture research.

28. Deng J, Heybati K. SHAP is meant for explaining model behaviors, not identifying statistical correlations. Injury 2026. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2026.113846

This methodological commentary argues that SHAP values, increasingly used in trauma and orthopaedic prediction studies, explain individual model predictions and should not be interpreted as measures of statistical association or causal importance. The authors illustrate how SHAP-based feature rankings can diverge from correlation-based inference and be misreported in the literature. Researchers should use SHAP strictly for model interpretation and reserve statistical association testing for appropriate inferential methods.

29. de Miguel Satué F, Babunashvili M, Haque S, et al. From missed injury to overdiagnosis. Injury 2026. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2026.113841

This perspective piece examines the tension between missed injuries and overdiagnosis in trauma care, tracing how heightened imaging sensitivity and defensive practice shift errors from under- to over-diagnosis. The authors discuss the clinical and system-level harms of overdiagnosis alongside the persistent risk of missed injury. Balanced diagnostic strategies and clinical judgment remain essential to avoid replacing one error mode with another.

Alignment, Anatomy and Implants (7)

1. Al-Amoodi MJH, Theologis AA. Anatomic Variations of the Sacrum and Lumbosacral Junction: Clinical Implications for Orthopaedic and Spine Surgeons. Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons 2026. doi:10.5435/jaaos-d-26-00142

This review describes anatomic variations of the sacrum and lumbosacral junction, including sacral dysmorphism and lumbosacral transitional anatomy (Bertolotti syndrome), with their associated imaging findings and classification. Key findings emphasize that these variants are common and heterogeneous, each affecting surgical planning, instrumentation strategies, and outcomes. Clinically, surgeons performing sacropelvic injury fixation or lumbosacral reconstruction must recognize these variations to optimise operative decision-making.

9. Scheckel B, Naumann M, Simic D, et al. Correction: Supplementary orthopaedic screening for children and adolescents to prevent permanent skeletal deformities – protocol for the “OrthoKids” study. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 2026. doi:10.1186/s12891-026-10071-0

This is a correction notice for the OrthoKids study protocol, amending two statements in the original publication. The assumed dropout rate was corrected from 20% to 30%, and an imprecise description of the multiple imputation approach for missing data was revised. The corrections matter for readers assessing the study's sample size justification and planned statistical analysis.

10. Rubin I, Bruggeman A, Bozic KJ. Payment Model Evolution for Spinal Fusions. Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons 2026. doi:10.5435/jaaos-d-26-00102

This review traces the evolution of US value-based payment models using spinal fusion as a case study, comparing BPCI-A, TEAM, ACCESS, the Ambulatory Specialty Model, and proposed condition-based bundles. It finds a progression from voluntary bundled payments toward mandatory participation models with increasing requirements for specialist accountability and primary care integration. Spine surgeons and health systems should prepare for mandatory episode-based payment structures that tie reimbursement to quality measurement and care coordination.

11. Al Abdallat A. Proportional Harmony or Radiographic Precision? Interpreting the Role of T4-L1 Pelvic Angle Normalization in Long-Segment Adult Spinal Deformity Fusion. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 2026. doi:10.2106/jbjs.26.00295

This commentary interprets a study by Mohanty et al. examining whether normalization of the T4-L1 pelvic angle relative to the L1-pelvic angle reduces mechanical complications and improves patient-reported outcomes after long-segment adult spinal deformity fusion. It situates the findings within the shift from global sagittal metrics toward proportional, pelvic incidence-based alignment strategies. The commentary suggests that proportional alignment targets may refine surgical planning, though the clinical value of radiographic normalization must be weighed against patient-centered outcomes.

17. Klockner FS, von Stosch D, Jäckle K, et al. The influence of pelvic tilt on regional bone mineral density of the sacrum: A quantitative CT analysis. Injury 2026. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2026.113517

In 204 patients with CT and standing radiographs, quantitative CT measured trabecular volumetric BMD at five S1 regions (lateral masses, alae, vertebral body) and related these to pelvic tilt measured on radiographs. Greater pelvic tilt was associated with altered regional sacral BMD distribution, reflecting changed load transfer through the lumbosacral junction. Pelvic tilt may serve as a marker for identifying patients at risk of sacral insufficiency fractures and should be considered when assessing sacral bone quality.

24. Leyland NA. Presidential Installation Speech, Annual Clinical and Scientific Meeting, 2026. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada 2026. doi:10.1016/j.jogc.2026.103545

This presidential address reflects on the historical neglect of scoliosis within orthopaedic training and the evolution of spinal deformity care over the author's 25-year career. It emphasizes that treatment principles must vary with the etiology and magnitude of the deformity and notes growing interest but persistent knowledge gaps. The address underscores the need for improved education in spinal deformity surgery among orthopaedic residents.

27. Abbo J, Thomas J, Stipho C, et al. Metal Hypersensitivity Reactions Following Spinal Implants. JBJS Reviews 2026. doi:10.2106/jbjs.rvw.26.00099

A systematic review of 15 studies (19 patients) characterized the clinical presentation, diagnostic workup, and outcomes of metal hypersensitivity reactions after spinal implant surgery. Reactions typically presented with rash, pain, or effusion mimicking infection or mechanical failure, and diagnosis relied on patch testing, lymphocyte transformation testing, and implant revision in most cases. Clinicians should consider metal hypersensitivity in the differential for unexplained symptoms after spinal instrumentation, though evidence remains limited to case-level data.

Brachial Plexus Correspondence (1)

4. Bahm J. Re. Beaumont et al. Anatomical predisposition and neurological vulnerability to brachial plexus birth injury: a contemporary narrative review. Journal of Hand Surgery (European Volume) 2026. doi:10.1177/17531934261488677

This letter critiques Beaumont et al.'s hypothesis that inherent nerve tissue fragility and anatomic predisposition explain some obstetric brachial plexus injuries, analogous to neurogenic thoracic outlet syndrome. The author argues the hypothesis is unsubstantiated and could be exploited in litigation to defend obstetricians by shifting burden of proof to parents. Clinically, the author cautions against adopting unproven fragility theories into the medicolegal framework surrounding birth injuries.

Creative Commons BY-NC 4.0

CC Creative Commons licence
BY Attribution — you must credit the source
NC NonCommercial — not for commercial use

Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International

Creative Commons Corporation ("Creative Commons") is not a law firm and does not provide legal services or legal advice. Distribution of Creative Commons public licenses does not create a lawyer-client or other relationship. Creative Commons makes its licenses and related information available on an "as-is" basis. Creative Commons gives no warranties regarding its licenses, any material licensed under their terms and conditions, or any related information. Creative Commons disclaims all liability for damages resulting from their use to the fullest extent possible.

Using Creative Commons Public Licenses

Creative Commons public licenses provide a standard set of terms and conditions that creators and other rights holders may use to share original works of authorship and other material subject to copyright and certain other rights specified in the public license below. The following considerations are for informational purposes only, are not exhaustive, and do not form part of our licenses.

Considerations for licensors: Our public licenses are intended for use by those authorized to give the public permission to use material in ways otherwise restricted by copyright and certain other rights. Our licenses are irrevocable. Licensors should read and understand the terms and conditions of the license they choose before applying it. Licensors should also secure all rights necessary before applying our licenses so that the public can reuse the material as expected. Licensors should clearly mark any material not subject to the license. This includes other CC- licensed material, or material used under an exception or limitation to copyright. More considerations for licensors: wiki.creativecommons.org/Considerations_for_licensors

Considerations for the public: By using one of our public licenses, a licensor grants the public permission to use the licensed material under specified terms and conditions. If the licensor's permission is not necessary for any reason--for example, because of any applicable exception or limitation to copyright--then that use is not regulated by the license. Our licenses grant only permissions under copyright and certain other rights that a licensor has authority to grant. Use of the licensed material may still be restricted for other reasons, including because others have copyright or other rights in the material. A licensor may make special requests, such as asking that all changes be marked or described. Although not required by our licenses, you are encouraged to respect those requests where reasonable. More considerations for the public: wiki.creativecommons.org/Considerations_for_licensees

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International Public License

By exercising the Licensed Rights (defined below), You accept and agree to be bound by the terms and conditions of this Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International Public License ("Public License"). To the extent this Public License may be interpreted as a contract, You are granted the Licensed Rights in consideration of Your acceptance of these terms and conditions, and the Licensor grants You such rights in consideration of benefits the Licensor receives from making the Licensed Material available under these terms and conditions.

Section 1 -- Definitions.

a. Adapted Material means material subject to Copyright and Similar Rights that is derived from or based upon the Licensed Material and in which the Licensed Material is translated, altered, arranged, transformed, or otherwise modified in a manner requiring permission under the Copyright and Similar Rights held by the Licensor. For purposes of this Public License, where the Licensed Material is a musical work, performance, or sound recording, Adapted Material is always produced where the Licensed Material is synched in timed relation with a moving image.

b. Adapter's License means the license You apply to Your Copyright and Similar Rights in Your contributions to Adapted Material in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Public License.

c. Copyright and Similar Rights means copyright and/or similar rights closely related to copyright including, without limitation, performance, broadcast, sound recording, and Sui Generis Database Rights, without regard to how the rights are labeled or categorized. For purposes of this Public License, the rights specified in Section 2(b)(1)-(2) are not Copyright and Similar Rights.

d. Effective Technological Measures means those measures that, in the absence of proper authority, may not be circumvented under laws fulfilling obligations under Article 11 of the WIPO Copyright Treaty adopted on December 20, 1996, and/or similar international agreements.

e. Exceptions and Limitations means fair use, fair dealing, and/or any other exception or limitation to Copyright and Similar Rights that applies to Your use of the Licensed Material.

f. Licensed Material means the artistic or literary work, database, or other material to which the Licensor applied this Public License.

g. Licensed Rights means the rights granted to You subject to the terms and conditions of this Public License, which are limited to all Copyright and Similar Rights that apply to Your use of the Licensed Material and that the Licensor has authority to license.

h. Licensor means the individual(s) or entity(ies) granting rights under this Public License.

i. NonCommercial means not primarily intended for or directed towards commercial advantage or monetary compensation. For purposes of this Public License, the exchange of the Licensed Material for other material subject to Copyright and Similar Rights by digital file-sharing or similar means is NonCommercial provided there is no payment of monetary compensation in connection with the exchange.

j. Share means to provide material to the public by any means or process that requires permission under the Licensed Rights, such as reproduction, public display, public performance, distribution, dissemination, communication, or importation, and to make material available to the public including in ways that members of the public may access the material from a place and at a time individually chosen by them.

k. Sui Generis Database Rights means rights other than copyright resulting from Directive 96/9/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 1996 on the legal protection of databases, as amended and/or succeeded, as well as other essentially equivalent rights anywhere in the world.

l. You means the individual or entity exercising the Licensed Rights under this Public License. Your has a corresponding meaning.

Section 2 -- Scope.

a. License grant.

1. Subject to the terms and conditions of this Public License, the Licensor hereby grants You a worldwide, royalty-free, non-sublicensable, non-exclusive, irrevocable license to exercise the Licensed Rights in the Licensed Material to:

a. reproduce and Share the Licensed Material, in whole or in part, for NonCommercial purposes only; and

b. produce, reproduce, and Share Adapted Material for NonCommercial purposes only.

2. Exceptions and Limitations. For the avoidance of doubt, where Exceptions and Limitations apply to Your use, this Public License does not apply, and You do not need to comply with its terms and conditions.

3. Term. The term of this Public License is specified in Section 6(a).

4. Media and formats; technical modifications allowed. The Licensor authorizes You to exercise the Licensed Rights in all media and formats whether now known or hereafter created, and to make technical modifications necessary to do so. The Licensor waives and/or agrees not to assert any right or authority to forbid You from making technical modifications necessary to exercise the Licensed Rights, including technical modifications necessary to circumvent Effective Technological Measures. For purposes of this Public License, simply making modifications authorized by this Section 2(a) (4) never produces Adapted Material.

5. Downstream recipients.

a. Offer from the Licensor -- Licensed Material. Every recipient of the Licensed Material automatically receives an offer from the Licensor to exercise the Licensed Rights under the terms and conditions of this Public License.

b. No downstream restrictions. You may not offer or impose any additional or different terms or conditions on, or apply any Effective Technological Measures to, the Licensed Material if doing so restricts exercise of the Licensed Rights by any recipient of the Licensed Material.

6. No endorsement. Nothing in this Public License constitutes or may be construed as permission to assert or imply that You are, or that Your use of the Licensed Material is, connected with, or sponsored, endorsed, or granted official status by, the Licensor or others designated to receive attribution as provided in Section 3(a)(1)(A)(i).

b. Other rights.

1. Moral rights, such as the right of integrity, are not licensed under this Public License, nor are publicity, privacy, and/or other similar personality rights; however, to the extent possible, the Licensor waives and/or agrees not to assert any such rights held by the Licensor to the limited extent necessary to allow You to exercise the Licensed Rights, but not otherwise.

2. Patent and trademark rights are not licensed under this Public License.

3. To the extent possible, the Licensor waives any right to collect royalties from You for the exercise of the Licensed Rights, whether directly or through a collecting society under any voluntary or waivable statutory or compulsory licensing scheme. In all other cases the Licensor expressly reserves any right to collect such royalties, including when the Licensed Material is used other than for NonCommercial purposes.

Section 3 -- License Conditions.

Your exercise of the Licensed Rights is expressly made subject to the following conditions.

a. Attribution.

1. If You Share the Licensed Material (including in modified form), You must:

a. retain the following if it is supplied by the Licensor with the Licensed Material:

i. identification of the creator(s) of the Licensed Material and any others designated to receive attribution, in any reasonable manner requested by the Licensor (including by pseudonym if designated);

ii. a copyright notice;

iii. a notice that refers to this Public License;

iv. a notice that refers to the disclaimer of warranties;

v. a URI or hyperlink to the Licensed Material to the extent reasonably practicable;

b. indicate if You modified the Licensed Material and retain an indication of any previous modifications; and

c. indicate the Licensed Material is licensed under this Public License, and include the text of, or the URI or hyperlink to, this Public License.

2. You may satisfy the conditions in Section 3(a)(1) in any reasonable manner based on the medium, means, and context in which You Share the Licensed Material. For example, it may be reasonable to satisfy the conditions by providing a URI or hyperlink to a resource that includes the required information.

3. If requested by the Licensor, You must remove any of the information required by Section 3(a)(1)(A) to the extent reasonably practicable.

4. If You Share Adapted Material You produce, the Adapter's License You apply must not prevent recipients of the Adapted Material from complying with this Public License.

Section 4 -- Sui Generis Database Rights.

Where the Licensed Rights include Sui Generis Database Rights that apply to Your use of the Licensed Material:

a. for the avoidance of doubt, Section 2(a)(1) grants You the right to extract, reuse, reproduce, and Share all or a substantial portion of the contents of the database for NonCommercial purposes only;

b. if You include all or a substantial portion of the database contents in a database in which You have Sui Generis Database Rights, then the database in which You have Sui Generis Database Rights (but not its individual contents) is Adapted Material; and

c. You must comply with the conditions in Section 3(a) if You Share all or a substantial portion of the contents of the database.

For the avoidance of doubt, this Section 4 supplements and does not replace Your obligations under this Public License where the Licensed Rights include other Copyright and Similar Rights.

Section 5 -- Disclaimer of Warranties and Limitation of Liability.

a. UNLESS OTHERWISE SEPARATELY UNDERTAKEN BY THE LICENSOR, TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE, THE LICENSOR OFFERS THE LICENSED MATERIAL AS-IS AND AS-AVAILABLE, AND MAKES NO REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND CONCERNING THE LICENSED MATERIAL, WHETHER EXPRESS, IMPLIED, STATUTORY, OR OTHER. THIS INCLUDES, WITHOUT LIMITATION, WARRANTIES OF TITLE, MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, NON-INFRINGEMENT, ABSENCE OF LATENT OR OTHER DEFECTS, ACCURACY, OR THE PRESENCE OR ABSENCE OF ERRORS, WHETHER OR NOT KNOWN OR DISCOVERABLE. WHERE DISCLAIMERS OF WARRANTIES ARE NOT ALLOWED IN FULL OR IN PART, THIS DISCLAIMER MAY NOT APPLY TO YOU.

b. TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE, IN NO EVENT WILL THE LICENSOR BE LIABLE TO YOU ON ANY LEGAL THEORY (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, NEGLIGENCE) OR OTHERWISE FOR ANY DIRECT, SPECIAL, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE, EXEMPLARY, OR OTHER LOSSES, COSTS, EXPENSES, OR DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF THIS PUBLIC LICENSE OR USE OF THE LICENSED MATERIAL, EVEN IF THE LICENSOR HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH LOSSES, COSTS, EXPENSES, OR DAMAGES. WHERE A LIMITATION OF LIABILITY IS NOT ALLOWED IN FULL OR IN PART, THIS LIMITATION MAY NOT APPLY TO YOU.

c. The disclaimer of warranties and limitation of liability provided above shall be interpreted in a manner that, to the extent possible, most closely approximates an absolute disclaimer and waiver of all liability.

Section 6 -- Term and Termination.

a. This Public License applies for the term of the Copyright and Similar Rights licensed here. However, if You fail to comply with this Public License, then Your rights under this Public License terminate automatically.

b. Where Your right to use the Licensed Material has terminated under Section 6(a), it reinstates:

1. automatically as of the date the violation is cured, provided it is cured within 30 days of Your discovery of the violation; or

2. upon express reinstatement by the Licensor.

For the avoidance of doubt, this Section 6(b) does not affect any right the Licensor may have to seek remedies for Your violations of this Public License.

c. For the avoidance of doubt, the Licensor may also offer the Licensed Material under separate terms or conditions or stop distributing the Licensed Material at any time; however, doing so will not terminate this Public License.

d. Sections 1, 5, 6, 7, and 8 survive termination of this Public License.

Section 7 -- Other Terms and Conditions.

a. The Licensor shall not be bound by any additional or different terms or conditions communicated by You unless expressly agreed.

b. Any arrangements, understandings, or agreements regarding the Licensed Material not stated herein are separate from and independent of the terms and conditions of this Public License.

Section 8 -- Interpretation.

a. For the avoidance of doubt, this Public License does not, and shall not be interpreted to, reduce, limit, restrict, or impose conditions on any use of the Licensed Material that could lawfully be made without permission under this Public License.

b. To the extent possible, if any provision of this Public License is deemed unenforceable, it shall be automatically reformed to the minimum extent necessary to make it enforceable. If the provision cannot be reformed, it shall be severed from this Public License without affecting the enforceability of the remaining terms and conditions.

c. No term or condition of this Public License will be waived and no failure to comply consented to unless expressly agreed to by the Licensor.

d. Nothing in this Public License constitutes or may be interpreted as a limitation upon, or waiver of, any privileges and immunities that apply to the Licensor or You, including from the legal processes of any jurisdiction or authority.

Creative Commons is not a party to its public licenses. Notwithstanding, Creative Commons may elect to apply one of its public licenses to material it publishes and in those instances will be considered the “Licensor.” The text of the Creative Commons public licenses is dedicated to the public domain under the CC0 Public Domain Dedication. Except for the limited purpose of indicating that material is shared under a Creative Commons public license or as otherwise permitted by the Creative Commons policies published at creativecommons.org/policies, Creative Commons does not authorize the use of the trademark "Creative Commons" or any other trademark or logo of Creative Commons without its prior written consent including, without limitation, in connection with any unauthorized modifications to any of its public licenses or any other arrangements, understandings, or agreements concerning use of licensed material. For the avoidance of doubt, this paragraph does not form part of the public licenses.

Creative Commons may be contacted at creativecommons.org.