Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33737771›Full record

ArticleThe Indian journal of radiology & imaging

Is thoracic facet joint arthritis over-reported? It's time to review CT grading parameters - An analytical cross-sectional study.

Punit Tiwari, Harmeet Kaur, Vivek Jha

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Indian journal of radiology & imaging. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 77% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Punit TiwariDepartment of Orthopaedics, Maharishi Markandeshwar Medical College and Hospital, Solan, Himachal Pradesh, India.
Harmeet KaurDepartment of Radiodiagnosis, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Bathinda, Punjab, India.
Vivek JhaDepartment of Orthopaedics, Maharishi Markandeshwar Medical College and Hospital, Solan, Himachal Pradesh, India.
Maharishi Markandeshwar University, Mullana · INAll India Institute of Medical Sciences · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn the absence of any exclusive classification for dorsal FJA, there is a lot of confusion while labelling grade 1 FJA in thoracic spine based on decreased FJ space. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to know the facet joint space measurements in thoracic spine of asymptomatic and symptomatic participants and to comment whether the lower cut-off of 2 mm used in lumbar FJA classification can be safely applied in thoracic spine too. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis cross-sectional study was done from December 1, 2018 to November 30, 2019. Patients above 18 years of age in this study who underwent CT thorax for causes unrelated to dorsal spinal pain were included. IBM SPSS Statistics v 26 was used for statistical analysis.

resultsWe measured and analysed 1512 thoracic facet joints in 63 patients (30 females and 33 males) in both axial and sagittal plane on CT scan. Mean age of the entire sample was 59.19 ± 15.19 years, ranging from 33 to 97 years and a standard error of mean 1.365 years. Overall mean thoracic facet joint space was measured to be 1.270 mm ± 0.3416 mm, ranging from 0 to 3.1 mm and a standard error of mean 0.0088 mm and a variance of 0.117 mm. The median was 1.300 mm while mode was 1.1 mm.

conclusionThe popular lumbar FJA classification by Weishupt

Indexed as

Dorsalfacet joint arthritisfacet joint spacemeasurementsthoracicwidth

Identifiers

PMID33737771
PMCPMC7954162
OpenAlexW3120452527

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.