Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27482710›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2016

Reported Outcome Measures in Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: A Systematic Review.

Benjamin M Davies, Maire McHugh, Ali Elgheriani, Angelos G Kolias, Lindsay A Tetreault, Peter J A Hutchinson, Michael G Fehlings, Mark R N Kotter

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04631471 (Regeneration in Cervical Degenerative Myelopathy - a Multi-centre, Double-blind, Randomised, Placebo Controlled Trial Assessing the Efficacy of Ibudilast as an Adjuvant Treatment to Decompressive Surgery for Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy), which is not on this map. Cited by 46 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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.

NCT04631471 phase3recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Regeneration in Cervical Degenerative Myelopathy - a Multi-centre, Double-blind, Randomised, Placebo Controlled Trial Assessing the Efficacy of Ibudilast as an Adjuvant Treatment to Decompressive Surgery for Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy

TypeinterventionalSponsorCambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustRan2021 to 2026Enrolled400ConditionsMyelopathy, Spinal Cord DiseasesArmsIbudilast, Cervical decompressive surgery, Matching placebo
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

46 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 84 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Understanding degenerative cervical myelopathy in musculoskeletal practice.The Journal of manual & manipulative therapy · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Benjamin M DaviesAcademic Neurosurgery Unit, Department of Clinical Neurosurgery, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0591-5069
Maire McHughAcademic Neurosurgery Unit, Department of Clinical Neurosurgery, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Ali ElgherianiToronto Western Hospital, University Health Network & University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Angelos G KoliasAcademic Neurosurgery Unit, Department of Clinical Neurosurgery, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Lindsay A TetreaultToronto Western Hospital, University Health Network & University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Peter J A HutchinsonAcademic Neurosurgery Unit, Department of Clinical Neurosurgery, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Michael G FehlingsToronto Western Hospital, University Health Network & University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Mark R N KotterAcademic Neurosurgery Unit, Department of Clinical Neurosurgery, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
University Health Network · CAUniversity of Cambridge · GB

Funding

Department of Health NIHR-RP-R3-12-013Medical Research Council MC_PC_12009
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveDegenerative cervical myelopathy [DCM] is a disabling and increasingly prevalent group of diseases. Heterogeneous reporting of trial outcomes limits effective inter-study comparison and optimisation of treatment. This is recognised in many fields of healthcare research. The present study aims to assess the heterogeneity of outcome reporting in DCM as the premise for the development of a standardised reporting set.

methodsA systematic review of MEDLINE and EMBASE databases, registered with PROSPERO (CRD42015025497) was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Full text articles in English, with >50 patients (prospective) or >200 patients (retrospective), reporting outcomes of DCM were eligible.

results108 studies, assessing 23,876 patients, conducted world-wide, were identified. Reported outcome themes included function (reported by 97, 90% of studies), complications (reported by 56, 52% of studies), quality of life (reported by 31, 29% of studies), pain (reported by 29, 27% of studies) and imaging (reported by 59, 55% of studies). Only 7 (6%) studies considered all of domains in a single publication. All domains showed variability in reporting.

conclusionsSignificant heterogeneity exists in the reporting of outcomes in DCM. The development of a consensus minimum dataset will facilitate future research synthesis.

Indexed as

Cervical VertebraeHumansOutcome Assessment, Health CarePainProspective StudiesQuality of LifeRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRecovery of FunctionRetrospective StudiesSpinal Cord Compression

Identifiers

PMID27482710
PMCPMC4970758
OpenAlexW2489493357

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
Read underepoch 390

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.