ReviewAnnals of translational medicine2019
Prognostic models for spinal metastatic disease: evolution of methodologies, limitations, and future opportunities.
Review in Annals of translational medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Prognostic scores for survival as decisional support for surgery in spinal metastases: a performance assessment systematic review.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 · 2021Pooled it
- Vertebral metastatic disease: A paradigm shift.Neuro-oncology advances · 2026Review
- Cancer-specific survival patterns in patients with bone metastasis: a registry-based analysis of 13,742 patients.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Days at home after treatment of spinal metastases: measurement and validation of a novel patient centered outcome.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2025Article
- Predictive Modeling for Spinal Metastatic Disease.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- An Updated Review on the Treatment Strategy for Spinal Metastasis from the Spine Surgeon's Perspective.Asian spine journal · 2022Article
- Treatment Strategy for Metastatic Spinal Tumors: A Narrative Review.Asian spine journal · 2020Article
- Predictive Analytics in Spine Oncology Research: First Steps, Limitations, and Future Directions.Neurospine · 2019Article
- Development and validation of the Home time and Overall survival after Metastatic spine tumor surgery Estimator (HOME score).Neuro-oncology advancesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Advances in cancer biology and therapy have increased survival of metastatic disease patients and, in turn, the rates of metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC). Surgery can improve patient quality of life, but accurate estimation of postoperative survival is critical for appropriate patient selection, multidisciplinary management, and shared decision making. Survival estimation on the basis of clinician judgement alone has been shown to be inaccurate and unreliable. Numerous prognostic scoring systems have been developed to address this need but the inputs to these models, the modeling methodologies, and the model outputs have evolved significantly over time. Here we discuss the available scoring systems, existing limitations, and future opportunities.
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.