Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30356854›Full record

Trial reportChiropractic & manual therapies2018

Degenerative findings on MRI of the cervical spine: an inter- and intra-rater reliability study.

Line Thorndal Moll, Morten Wasmod Kindt, Christina Malmose Stapelfeldt, Tue Secher Jensen

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Chiropractic & manual therapies, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Double trouble - identifying rating inconsistencies due to double ratings of the "Show backbone" study.Journal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England) · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Line Thorndal Moll1DEFACTUM, Central Denmark Region, P.P. Oerums Gade 11, bygn. 1B, DK-8000 Aarhus C, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0003-4132-0310
Morten Wasmod KindtDepartment for Diagnostic Imaging, Diagnostic Centre, University Research Clinic for Innovative Patient Pathways, Silkeborg Regional Hospital, Falkevej 1-3, DK-8600 Silkeborg, Denmark.
Christina Malmose Stapelfeldt1DEFACTUM, Central Denmark Region, P.P. Oerums Gade 11, bygn. 1B, DK-8000 Aarhus C, Denmark.
Tue Secher JensenDepartment for Diagnostic Imaging, Diagnostic Centre, University Research Clinic for Innovative Patient Pathways, Silkeborg Regional Hospital, Falkevej 1-3, DK-8600 Silkeborg, Denmark.
Aarhus University · DKRegionshospitalet Silkeborg · DKUniversity of Southern Denmark · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Knowledge about the assessment reliability of common cervical spine changes is a prerequisite for precise and consistent communication about Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) findings. The purpose of this study was to determine the inter- and intra-rater reliability of degenerative findings when assessing cervical spine MRI. Methods: Fifty cervical spine MRIs from subjects with neck pain were used. A radiologist, a chiropractor and a second-year resident of rheumatology independently assessed kyphosis, disc height, disc contour, vertebral endplate signal changes, spinal canal stenosis, neural foraminal stenosis, and osteoarthritis of the uncovertebral and zygapophyseal joints. An evaluation manual was composed containing classifications and illustrative examples, and ten of the MRIs were evaluated twice followed by consensus meetings to refine the classifications. Next, the three readers independently assessed the full sample. Reliability measures were reported using prevalence estimates and unweighted kappa (Κ) statistics. Results: The overall inter-rater reliability was substantial (Κ ≥ 0.61) for the majority of variables and moderate only for zygapophyseal osteoarthritis (Κ = 0.56). Intra-rater reliability estimates were higher for all findings. Conclusions: The present classifications for some of the most common cervical degenerative findings yielded mainly substantial inter-rater reliability estimates and substantial to almost perfect intra-rater reliability estimates. . Trial registration: Regional Data Protection Agency (J.no. 1-16-02-86-16). The letter of exemption from the Regional Ethical Committee is available from the author on request (case no. 86 / 2017).

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultCervical VertebraeFemaleHumansIntervertebral Disc DegenerationMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedNeck PainOsteoarthritisReproducibility of ResultsYoung AdultAgreementCervical spineClassificationDegenerativeMagnetic resonance imagingMRIReliability

Identifiers

PMID30356854
PMCPMC6190655
OpenAlexW2891222096

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.