Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30300137›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2019

A Novel Insight Into the Challenges of Diagnosing Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy Using Web-Based Symptom Checkers.

Benjamin Marshall Davies, Colin Fraser Munro, Mark Rn Kotter

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2019. 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 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.7field-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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Benjamin Marshall Davies *Academic Neurosurgery Unit, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-0591-5069
Colin Fraser Munro *School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-7235-3970
Mark Rn KotterAcademic Neurosurgery Unit, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-5145-7199
University of Cambridge · GBWellcome/MRC Cambridge Stem Cell Institute · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_PC_12009
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDegenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is a common debilitating condition resulting from degeneration of the cervical spine. While decompressive surgery can halt disease progression, existing spinal cord damage is often permanent, leaving patients with lifelong disability. Early surgery improves the likelihood of recovery, yet the average time from the onset of symptoms to correct diagnosis is over 2 years. The majority of delays occur initially, before and within primary care, mainly due to a lack of recognition. Symptom checkers are widely used by patients before medical consultation and can be useful for preliminary triage and diagnosis. Lack of recognition of DCM by symptom checkers may contribute to the delay in diagnosis.

objectiveThe aims of this study were to investigate whether Web-based symptom checkers were able to recognize relevant symptoms of DCM, to characterize the DCM differential they returned , and to evaluate the diagnostic performance of recognized DCM symptoms.

methodsWe pooled classical DCM symptoms from leading review articles. These symptoms were entered into the algorithms used by the top 20 symptom checker websites (N=4; Google Search). The most widely cited symptom checker, WebMD, was used to characterize the differential diagnosis for DCM symptoms.

resultsA total of 31 classical DCM symptoms were identified, of which 45% (14/31) listed DCM as a differential and 10% (3/31) placed DCM in the top third of the differential. The mean differential rank for motor symptoms was significantly better than that for arthritic symptoms (P=.01) and the average differential rank for all symptoms (P=.048). The symptom checker WebMD performed best at recognizing DCM, placing the condition nearer to the top of the differential list (mean rank of 5.6) than either Healthline (rank of 12.9, P=.02) or Healthtools.AARP (rank of 15.5, P=.001). On WebMD, only one combination of symptoms resulted in DCM as the primary differential: neck, shoulder, and arm pain with hand weakness. Moreover, 151 differential diagnoses for DCM symptoms were recorded on WebMD. Multiple sclerosis and peripheral neuropathy were the most common differentials, shortlisted for 52% (16/31) and 32% (10/31) of the DCM symptoms, respectively.

conclusionsDCM symptoms are poorly identified by Web-based symptom checkers, which leads to a large differential of many other common conditions. While a diagnosis becomes more likely as the number of symptoms increases, this represents more advanced disease and will not support much-needed earlier diagnosis. Symptom checkers remain an attractive concept with potential. Further research is required to support their optimization.

Indexed as

Cervical VertebraeDisease ProgressionFemaleHumansInternetMaleSpinal Cord Diseasescord compressiondegenerative cervical myelopathydiagnosisdifferentialspondylosis

Identifiers

PMID30300137
PMCPMC6330198
OpenAlexW2886570502

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.