ArticleJournal of patient experience2020
Patient Information Leaflets for Lumbar Spine Surgery: A Missed Opportunity.
Article in Journal of patient experience, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Therapeutic exercise following lumbar spine surgery: a narrative review.North American Spine Society journal · 2025Article
- Article
- Enhancing treatment decision-making for low back pain: a novel framework integrating large language models with retrieval-augmented generation technology.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Physical therapy of patients undergoing first-time lumbar discectomy: a survey of current UK practice.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2022Article
- A Critical Analysis of the Exercise Prescription and Return to Activity Advice That Is Provided in Patient Information Leaflets Following Lumbar Spine Surgery.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2019Article
- "Women's health (London, England)Article
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
backgroundHigh-quality patient information is recommended to help reduce procedure-related anxiety and encourage patients to become active participants in their recovery. The objective of this study was to analyze the quality of patient information leaflets (PILs) given to National Health Service (NHS) patients ahead of lumbar spine surgery.
methodsThe DISCERN tool was used to evaluate the quality of PILs, sourced from NHS websites.
resultsThirty-two PILs on lumbar surgery were included. Two (6%) leaflets were considered poor, 13 (41%) were marked as fair, 14 (44%) were of good quality, and 3 (9%) were scored as excellent. The total mean score was 55 (30-74), which corresponds to good quality. The lowest scoring questions were sources of information (Q4), balanced/unbiased content (Q6), and explanation of no treatment (Q12).
conclusionsThere is considerable variation in the quality of PILs provided ahead of lumbar spine surgery. The scope for improvement is clear, and as the move toward patient-centered, evidence-based care continues, it is important that hospital resources provide recommendations based upon evidence of clinical effectiveness.
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.