Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28980155›Full record

ReviewCurrent reviews in musculoskeletal medicine2017

Degenerative Scoliosis.

Philip J York, Han Jo Kim

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.2field-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.

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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Pathogenic mechanisms of adult degenerative scoliosis.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Trends in Lumbosacral-Pelvic Fixation Strategies.International journal of spine surgery · 2025
    Article
  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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Philip J YorkDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Colorado, Aurora, CO, USA.
Han Jo KimHospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, 10021, USA. KimH@hss.edu.
Hospital for Special Surgery · USUniversity of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewThe purpose of this review is to provide an updated review of adult degenerative scoliosis (ADS). Epidemiology, classification, pathophysiology, and natural history are discussed along with a summary of commonly used outcome measures. Operative vs non-operative outcomes and new surgical techniques are discussed. RECENT

findingsThe SRS-Schwab classification (2012) combines clinical and radiographic evaluation including overall global alignment. Current evidence regarding risk factors and efficacy of non-surgical modalities are discussed. Recent studies have reported surgical management to provide superior outcomes to non-operative modalities. New surgical techniques provide promising early data in regard to decreasing perioperative morbidity. ADS is a potentially debilitating condition that occurs with asymmetric spinal degeneration. This can produce global sagittal malalignment and central and foraminal stenosis and can lead to significant impairment often necessitating surgery. The surgeon must be aware of the perioperative risks in this population and implement appropriate age-specific alignment goals to achieve the best outcome for patients.

Indexed as

Adult scoliosisDegenerative spineSpinal deformitySpinal stenosis

Identifiers

PMID28980155
PMCPMC5685967
OpenAlexW4205448511

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.