ArticleMedicine2020
Zero-profile versus cage-plate interbody fusion system in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for the treatment of multilevel cervical spondylosis: A protocol of systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe objective of this meta-analysis was to summarize and identify the available evidence from these studies to estimate which device was better for multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy (MCSM). And provides clinicians with evidence on which to base their clinical decision making.
methodsThis review will include all studies comparing the new Zero-profile versus cage-plate interbody fusion system in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for the treatment of MCSM. The search strategy will be performed in 9 databases. We will not establish any limitations to language and publication status, published from inception to the July, 2020. Two reviewers will screen, select studies, extract data, and assess quality independently. Outcome is operative time, blood loss, clinical function outcome, radiologic outcomes, and complications. The methodological quality including the risk of bias of the included studies will be evaluated. We will carry out statistical analysis using RevMan 5.3 software.
resultsThis study will summarize current evidence to assess the efficacy and safety of Zero-profile versus cage-plate interbody fusion system in ACDF for the treatment of MCSM.
conclusionThe findings of this study will provide helpful evidence for the clinician, and will promote further studies, as well as comparing the 2 devices in ACDF for MCSM REGISTRATION NUMBER:: INPLASY202070095 (DOI number: 10.37766/inplasy2020.7.0095).
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.