Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33588440›Full record

SynthesisNeurosurgery2021

Toward the Development of a Comprehensive Clinically Oriented Patient Profile: A Systematic Review of the Purpose, Characteristic, and Methodological Quality of Classification Systems of Adult Spinal Deformity.

Kenny Yat Hong Kwan, J Naresh-Babu, Wilco Jacobs, Marinus de Kleuver, David W Polly, Caglar Yilgor, Yabin Wu, Jong-Beom Park, Manabu Ito, Miranda L van Hooff

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Neurosurgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Kenny Yat Hong KwanDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong.ORCID 0000-0002-4034-8525
J Naresh-BabuDepartment of Spine Surgery, Mallika Spine Centre, Guntur, India.
Wilco JacobsThe Health Scientist, The Hague, The Netherlands.
Marinus de KleuverDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
David W PollyDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.
Caglar YilgorDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Acibadem Mehmet Ali Aydinlar University School of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey.
Yabin WuResearch Department, AO Spine International, Davos, Switzerland.
Jong-Beom ParkDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Uijeongbu St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea, Gyeonggi-do, Korea.
Manabu ItoDepartment of Orthopaedics, National Hospital Organization Hokkaido Medical Center, Sapporo, Japan.
Miranda L van HooffDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundExisting adult spinal deformity (ASD) classification systems are based on radiological parameters but management of ASD patients requires a holistic approach. A comprehensive clinically oriented patient profile and classification of ASD that can guide decision-making and correlate with patient outcomes is lacking.

objectiveTo perform a systematic review to determine the purpose, characteristic, and methodological quality of classification systems currently used in ASD.

methodsA systematic literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Web of Science for literature published between January 2000 and October 2018. From the included studies, list of classification systems, their methodological measurement properties, and correlation with treatment outcomes were analyzed.

resultsOut of 4470 screened references, 163 were included, and 54 different classification systems for ASD were identified. The most commonly used was the Scoliosis Research Society-Schwab classification system. A total of 35 classifications were based on radiological parameters, and no correlation was found between any classification system levels with patient-related outcomes. Limited evidence of limited quality was available on methodological quality of the classification systems. For studies that reported the data, intraobserver and interobserver reliability were good (kappa = 0.8).

conclusionThis systematic literature search revealed that current classification systems in clinical use neither include a comprehensive set of dimensions relevant to decision-making nor did they correlate with outcomes. A classification system comprising a core set of patient-related, radiological, and etiological characteristics relevant to the management of ASD is needed.

Indexed as

AdultHumansMalePractice Guidelines as TopicRadiographyReproducibility of ResultsScoliosisSpinal CurvaturesSpineTreatment OutcomeAdult spinal deformityCharacteristicsClassificationPurposeSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID33588440
PMCPMC8117436

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.