Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24967347›Full record

ReviewBioMed research international2014

The technological development of minimally invasive spine surgery.

Laura A Snyder, John O'Toole, Kurt M Eichholz, Mick J Perez-Cruet, Richard Fessler

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BioMed research international, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Augmented reality and artificial intelligence-based navigation during percutaneous vertebroplasty: a pilot randomised clinical trial.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 · 2020
    Trial
  2. Revision surgical technique for laterally placed MinuteManJournal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2026
    Article
  3. Minimally invasive approaches to intramedullary spinal cord tumors: a systematic review of techniques and outcomes.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 · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. The benefit zone of full-endoscopic spine surgery.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2019
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Laura A SnyderBarrow Neurological Institute, Phoenix, AZ 85013, USA.
John O'TooleRush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL 60612, USA.
Kurt M EichholzSt. Louis Minimally Invasive Spine Center, St. Louis, MO 63141, USA.
Mick J Perez-CruetMichigan Head and Spine Institute, Southfield, MI 48034, USA.
Richard FesslerRush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL 60612, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Minimally invasive spine surgery has its roots in the mid-twentieth century with a few surgeons and a few techniques, but it has now developed into a large field of progressive spinal surgery. A wide range of techniques are now called "minimally invasive," and case reports are submitted constantly with new "minimally invasive" approaches to spinal pathology. As minimally invasive spine surgery has become more mainstream over the past ten years, in this paper we discuss its history and development.

Indexed as

HumansMinimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresSpine

Identifiers

PMID24967347
PMCPMC4055392

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.