ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2020
Adult spinal deformity surgical decision-making score. Part 2: development and validation of a scoring system to guide the selection of treatment modalities for patients above 40 years with adult spinal deformity.
Article in 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, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Narrative Review of Symptom Severity and Duration in Nonoperative vs Operative Patients With Adult Spinal Deformity.Global spine journal · 2025Article
- Conquering the Cobb Angle: A Deep Learning Algorithm for Automated, Hardware-Invariant Measurement of Cobb Angle on Radiographs in Patients with Scoliosis.Radiology. Artificial intelligence · 2023Article
- ASD with high pelvic retroversion develop changes in their acetabular orientation during walking.Brain & spine · 2023Article
- Impact of radiologic variables on item responses of ODI, SRS22 and SF-36. in adult spinal deformity patients: differential item functioning (DIF) analysis results from a multi-center database.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 · 2022Article
- Article
- Article
- Impact of COVID-19 on the pain and disability of patients with adult spinal deformity.Spine deformity · 2021Article
- The Impact of Corrective Surgery on Health-Related Quality of Life Subclasses in Adult Scoliosis: Will Degree of Correction Prognosticate Degree of Improvement?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 · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe aimed to develop and internally validate a scoring system, the adult spinal deformity surgical decision-making (ASD-SDM) score, to guide the decision-making process for ASD patients aged above 40 years.
methodsA multicentre prospective ASD database was retrospectively reviewed. The scoring system was developed using data from a derivation set and was internally validated in a validation set. The performance of the ASD-SDM score for predicting surgical management was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC).
resultsA total of 702 patients were included for analysis in the present study. The scoring system developed based on 562 patients, ranging from 0 to 12 points, included five parameters: leg pain scored by the numerical rating scale; pain and self-image domains in the Scoliosis Research Society-22 score; coronal Cobb angle; and relative spinopelvic alignment. Surgical indication was graded as low (score 0 to 4), moderate (score 5 to 7), and high (score 8 to 12) groups. In the validation set of 140 patients, the AUC for predicting surgical management according to the ASD-SDM score was 0.797 (standard error = 0.037, P < 0.001, 95% confidence interval = 0.714 to 0.861), and in the low, moderate, and high surgical indication groups, 23.7%, 43.5%, and 80.4% of the patients, respectively, were treated surgically.
conclusionsThe ASD-SDM score demonstrated reliability, with higher scores indicating a higher probability of surgery. This index could aid in the selection of surgery for ASD patients in clinical settings. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31317308What 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.