ArticleSkeletal radiology2018
Reliability of standing weight-bearing (0.25T) MR imaging findings and positional changes in the lumbar spine.
Article in Skeletal radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Unilateral Endo-LIF in treating central lumbar spinal stenosis.BMC surgery · 2026Article
- An Evaluation of Lumbar Foraminal Stenosis Radiologic Grading Systems: A Systematic Review.Spine surgery and related research · 2026Review
- Surgical Stabilization of the Spine: A Clinical Review of Spinal Fractures, Spondylolisthesis, and Instrumentation Methods.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- ISSLS prize in clinical/bioengineering science 2024: How standing and supine positions influence nutrient transport in human lumbar discs?-A serial post-contrast MRI study evaluating interplay between convection and diffusion.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 · 2024Article
- Reliability of reporting differences in degenerative MRI findings of the lumbar spine from the supine to the upright position.Skeletal radiology · 2022Article
- Facet Joint Syndrome: Pathophysiology, Diagnosis, and Treatment.Journal of pain research · 2022Review
- Lumbar spondylolisthesis: STATE of the art on assessment and conservative treatment.Archives of physiotherapy · 2021Article
- Effects of standing on lumbar spine alignment and intervertebral disc geometry in young, healthy individuals determined by positional magnetic resonance imaging.Clinical biomechanics (Bristol, Avon) · 2019Observational
- Answer to the Letter to the Editor of Miao Yu et al. concerning "Is L5-S1 motion segment different from the rest? A radiographic kinematic assessment of 72 patients with chronic low back pain" by AB Sabnis et al. (Eur. Spine J; 27(5):1127-1135).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 · 2019Article
- Imaging of the spine: Where do we stand?World journal of radiology · 2019Article
- Correlation of listhesis on upright radiographs and central lumbar spinal canal stenosis on supine MRI: is it possible to predict lumbar spinal canal stenosis?Skeletal radiology · 2018Article
- Current concept in upright spinal MRI.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 · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo test the reliability and absolute agreement of common degenerative findings in standing positional magnetic resonance imaging (pMRI). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Low back pain patients with and without sciatica were consecutively enrolled to undergo a supine and standing pMRI. Three readers independently evaluated the standing pMRI for herniation, spinal stenosis, spondylolisthesis, HIZ lesions and facet joint effusion. The evaluation included a semi-quantitative grading of spinal stenosis, foraminal stenosis and spinal nerve root compression. The standing pMRI images were evaluated with full access to supine MRI. In case lower grades or the degenerative findings were not present in the supine images, this was reported separately as position-dependent changes. A subsample of 20 pMRI examinations was reevaluated after two months. The reproducibility was assessed by inter- and intra-reader reliability (kappa statistic) and absolute agreement between readers.
resultsFifty-six patients were included in this study. There was fair-to-substantial inter-reader reliability (κ 0.47 to 0.82) and high absolute agreement (72.3% to 99.1%) for the pMRI findings. The intra-reader assessment showed similar reliability and agreement (κ 0.36 to 0.85; absolute agreement: 62.5% to 98.8%). Positional changes between the supine and standing position showed a fair-to-moderate inter- and intra-reader reliability (κ 0.25 to 0.52; absolute agreement: 97.0% to 99.1).
conclusionEvaluation of the lumbar spine for degenerative findings by standing pMRI has acceptable reproducibility; however, positional changes from the supine to the standing position as an independent outcome should be interpreted with caution because of lower reliability, which calls for further standardisation.
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.