ReviewThe Medical journal of Australia2010
Invited editorial presents an accurate summary of the results of two randomised placebo-controlled trials of vertebroplasty.
Review in The Medical journal of Australia, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effectiveness of vertebroplasty using individual patient data from two randomised placebo controlled trials: meta-analysis.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2011Pooled it
- Launching Effectiveness Research to Guide Practice in Neurosurgery: A National Institute Neurological Disorders and Stroke Workshop Report.Neurosurgery · 2017Article
- Impact of sham-controlled vertebroplasty trials on referral patterns at two academic medical centers.Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center) · 2013Article
- Continuing conservative care versus crossover to radiofrequency kyphoplasty: a comparative effectiveness study on the treatment of vertebral body fractures.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2012Article
- Vertebroplasty and the placebo response.Radiology · 2011Article
- The case of vertebroplasty trials: promoting a culture of evidence-based procedural medicine.Spine · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Comment on
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Our recent editorial in the Journal presents an accurate summary of our two randomised trials of vertebroplasty, which found no benefit of vertebroplasty over placebo. Participants in both trials are representative of patients seen in clinical practice and who would qualify for government-subsidised funding of vertebroplasty in Australia. Clinical experience and previous published literature are likely to have overestimated the treatment benefit of vertebroplasty for many reasons. This is why randomised placebo-controlled trials are required to determine the efficacy of treatment interventions, particularly when the condition being treated is self-limiting and the primary end point is improvement of symptoms. Based on the best evidence currently available, the routine use of vertebroplasty outside of the research setting for painful osteoporotic vertebral fractures appears unjustified.
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.