ReviewFrontiers in surgery2020
Innovation and New Technologies in Spine Surgery, Circa 2020: A Fifty-Year Review.
Review in Frontiers in surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Technological Innovation in Cervical Spine Injury and Disease Treatment: A Systematic Bibliometric Review of Current Trends and Literature on Patent Technology.Spine surgery and related research · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence and machine learning in spine care: Advancing precision diagnosis, treatment, and rehabilitation.World journal of orthopedics · 2025Review
- Robotic spine surgery compared with fluoroscopic-assisted surgery: advantages, disadvantages, future perspectives.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Two-stage surgical correction of L4/5 non-union using ALIF and endoscopic TLIF cage removal: a case report.Journal of surgical case reports · 2025Article
- The Future of Arthroplasty in the Spine.International journal of spine surgery · 2025Article
- Patent bibliometrics in spinal deformity: the first bibliometric analysis of spinal deformity's technological literature.Spine deformity · 2024Review
- Systematic review of the top 10 ranked spine articles in the last 10 years [2011-2021].Annals of translational medicine · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Spine surgery (lumbar, cervical, deformity, and entire spine) has increased in volume and improved in outcomes over the past 50 years because of innovations in surgical techniques and introduction of new technologies to improve patient care. Innovation is described as a process to add value or create change in an enterprise's economic or social potential. This mini review will assess two of three assessments of innovation in spine surgery: scientific publications and patents issued. The review of both scientific publications and issued patents is a unique assessment. The third assessment of innovation: regulatory clearances of medical devices and equipment for spine surgery and their evolution over time, will also be discussed.
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.