Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35259164›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Clinical improvement after surgery for degenerative cervical myelopathy; A comparison of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures during 12-month follow-up.

Christer Mjåset, John-Anker Zwart, Frode Kolstad, Tore Solberg, Margreth Grotle

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Anterior versus posterior decompression and fusion for multilevel cervical myelopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Comparison of the patient-derived modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association scale and the European myelopathy score.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Christer MjåsetFaculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-0210-1396
John-Anker ZwartFaculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Frode KolstadDepartment of Neurosurgery, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Tore SolbergInstitute of Clinical Medicine, The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway.
Margreth GrotleDepartment of Research and Innovation, Division of Clinical Neuroscience, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Oslo University Hospital · NOUniversity Hospital of North Norway · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectAlthough many patients report clinical improvement after surgery due to degenerative cervical myelopathy, the aim of intervention is to stop progression of spinal cord dysfunction. We wanted to provide estimates and assess achievement rates of Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) at 3- and 12-month follow-up for Neck Disability Index (NDI), Numeric Rating Scale for arm pain (NRS-AP) and neck pain (NRS-NP), Euro-Qol (EQ-5D-3L), and European Myelopathy Score (EMS).

methods614 degenerative cervical myelopathy patients undergoing surgery responded to Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) prior to, 3 and 12 months after surgery. External criterion was the Global Perceived Effect Scale (1-7), defining MCID as "slightly better", "much better" and "completely recovered". MCID estimates with highest sensitivity and specificity were calculated by Receiver Operating Curves for change and percentage change scores in the whole sample and in anterior and posterior procedural groups.

resultsThe NDI and NRS-NP percentage change scores were the most accurate PROMs with a MCID of 16%. The change score for NDI and percentage change scores for NDI, NRS-AP and NRS-NP were slightly higher in the anterior procedure group compared to the posterior procedure group, while remaining PROM estimates were similar across procedure type. The MCID achievement rates at 12-month follow-up ranged from 51% in EMS to 62% in NRS-NP.

conclusionThe NDI and NRS-NP percentage change scores were the most accurate PROMs to measure clinical improvement after surgery for degenerative cervical myelopathy. We recommend using different cut-off estimates for anterior and posterior approach procedures. A MCID achievement rate of 60% or less must be interpreted in the perspective that the main goal of surgery for degenerative cervical myelopathy is to prevent worsening of the condition.

Indexed as

Spinal Cord DiseasesCervical VertebraeFollow-Up StudiesHumansNeck PainPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID35259164
PMCPMC8903279
OpenAlexW4221024865

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.