ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2023
A clinical decision support system in back pain helps to find the diagnosis: a prospective correlation study.
Article in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical Decision Support System Used in Spinal Disorders: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- A vision for the future of wearable sensors in spine care and its challenges: narrative review.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2022Review
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study is to show the concordance of an app-based decision support system and the diagnosis given by spinal surgeons in cases of back pain. 86 patients took part within 2 months. They were seen by spine surgeons in the daily routine and then completed an app-based questionnaire that also led to a diagnosis independently. The results showed a Cramer's V = .711 (p < .001), which can be taken as a strong relation between the tool and the diagnosis of the medical doctor. Besides, in 67.4% of the cases, the diagnosis was concordant. An overestimation of the severity of the diagnosis occurred more often than underestimation (15.1% vs. 7%). The app-based tool is a safe tool to support healthcare professionals in back pain diagnosis.
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.