ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2022
Semi-automated detection of cervical spinal cord compression with the Spinal Cord Toolbox.
Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Charting Cervical Spinal Cord Morphometry Across the Lifespan.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Cervical spinal cord morphometrics in degenerative cervical myelopathy: quantification using semi-automated normalized technique and correlation with neurological dysfunctions.The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society · 2024Article
- Reproducible Spinal Cord Quantitative MRI Analysis with the Spinal Cord Toolbox.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2024Review
- Automatic segmentation of dura for quantitative analysis of lumbar stenosis: A deep learning study with 518 CT myelograms.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2024Article
- Evidence-based commentary on the diagnosis, management, and further research of degenerative cervical spinal cord compression in the absence of clinical symptoms of myelopathy.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Review
- A database of the healthy human spinal cord morphometry in the PAM50 template space.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2024Article
- Quantitative MR Markers in Non-Myelopathic Spinal Cord Compression: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Brain Structural and Functional Dissociated Patterns in Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: A Case-Controlled Retrospective Resting-State fMRI Study.Frontiers in neurology · 2022Article
- Monitoring morphometric drift in lifelong learning segmentation of the spinal cord.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Degenerative cervical spinal cord compression is becoming increasingly prevalent, yet the MRI criteria that define compression are vague, and vary between studies. This contribution addresses the detection of compression by means of the Spinal Cord Toolbox (SCT) and assesses the variability of the morphometric parameters extracted with it. Methods: Prospective cross-sectional study. Two types of MRI examination, 3 and 1.5 T, were performed on 66 healthy controls and 118 participants with cervical spinal cord compression. Morphometric parameters from 3T MRI obtained by Spinal Cord Toolbox (cross-sectional area, solidity, compressive ratio, torsion) were combined in multivariate logistic regression models with the outcome (binary dependent variable) being the presence of compression determined by two radiologists. Inter-trial (between 3 and 1.5 T) and inter-rater (three expert raters and SCT) variability of morphometric parameters were assessed in a subset of 35 controls and 30 participants with compression. Results: The logistic model combining compressive ratio, cross-sectional area, solidity, torsion and one binary indicator, whether or not the compression was set at level C6/7, demonstrated outstanding compression detection (area under curve =0.947). The single best cut-off for predicted probability calculated using a multiple regression equation was 0.451, with a sensitivity of 87.3% and a specificity of 90.2%. The inter-trial variability was better in Spinal Cord Toolbox (intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.858 for compressive ratio and 0.735 for cross-sectional area) compared to expert raters (mean coefficient for three expert raters was 0.722 for compressive ratio and 0.486 for cross-sectional area). The analysis of inter-rater variability demonstrated general agreement between SCT and three expert raters, as the correlations between SCT and raters were generally similar to those of the raters between one another. Conclusions: This study demonstrates successful semi-automated compression detection based on four parameters. The inter-trial variability of parameters established through two MRI examinations was conclusively better for Spinal Cord Toolbox compared with that of three experts' manual ratings.
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.