ArticleGlobal spine journal2024
Determining Prior Authorization Approval for Lumbar Stenosis Surgery With Machine Learning.
Article in Global spine journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Artificial intelligence in prior authorization and coverage decisions: A systematic review of methods, evidence gaps, and future implications for patient access.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2026Pooled it
- Benchmarking of large language models to determine candidacy for spine surgery and comparison with conventional machine learning.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
- Identifying preoperative radiographic metrics to guide surgical selection in lumbar spondylolisthesis and stenosis.North American Spine Society journal · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence and Its Impact on the Management of Lumbar Degenerative Pathology: A Narrative Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Review
- Learning health system strategies in the AI era.npj health systems · 2025Review
- Artificial neural network analysis of factors affecting functional independence recovery in patients with lumbar stenosis after neurosurgery treatment: An observational cohort study.Journal of orthopaedics · 2024Article
- Current Applications of Artificial Intelligence in Billing Practices and Clinical Plastic Surgery.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2024Article
- Machine Learning Predicts Decompression Levels for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Using Canal Radiomic Features from Computed Tomography Myelography.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designMedical vignettes.
objectivesLumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is a degenerative condition with a high prevalence in the elderly population, that is associated with a significant economic burden and often requires spinal surgery. Prior authorization of surgical candidates is required before patients can be covered by a health plan and must be approved by medical directors (MDs), which is often subjective and clinician specific. In this study, we hypothesized that the prediction accuracy of machine learning (ML) methods regarding surgical candidates is comparable to that of a panel of MDs.
methodsBased on patient demographic factors, previous therapeutic history, symptoms and physical examinations and imaging findings, we propose an ML which computes the probability of spinal surgical recommendations for LSS. The model implements a random forest model trained from medical vignette data reviewed by MDs. Sets of 400 and 100 medical vignettes reviewed by MDs were used for training and testing.
resultsThe predictive accuracy of the machine learning model was with a root mean square error (RMSE) between model predictions and ground truth of .1123, while the average RMSE between individual MD's recommendations and ground truth was .2661. For binary classification, the AUROC and Cohen's kappa were .959 and .801, while the corresponding average metrics based on individual MD's recommendations were .844 and .564, respectively.
conclusionsOur results suggest that ML can be used to automate prior authorization approval of surgery for LSS with performance comparable to a panel of MDs.
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.