ArticleJournal of orthopaedics
Estimating survival and choosing treatment for spinal metastases: Do spine surgeons agree with each other?
Article in Journal of orthopaedics. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predictive Modeling for Spinal Metastatic Disease.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Determining patients with spinal metastases suitable for surgical intervention: A cost-effective analysis.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Ten Years After SINS: Role of Surgery and Radiotherapy in the Management of Patients With Vertebral Metastases.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Review
- Development and validation of the Home time and Overall survival after Metastatic spine tumor surgery Estimator (HOME score).Neuro-oncology advancesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to investigate spine surgeons' ability to estimate survival in patients with spinal metastases and whether survival estimates influence treatment recommendations.
methods60 Spine surgeons were asked a survival estimate and treatment recommendation in 12 cases. Intraclass correlation coefficients and descriptive statistics were used to evaluate variability, accuracy and association of survival estimates with treatment recommendation.
resultsThere was substantial variability in survival estimates amongst the spine surgeons. Survival was generally overestimated, and longer estimated survival seemed to lead to more invasive procedures.
conclusionsPrognostic models to estimate survival may aid surgeons treating patients with spinal metastases.
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.