ArticleInternational journal of spine surgery2023
The Role of Psychosocial Screening in Patient Selection for Spine Surgery: A Review.
Article in International journal of spine surgery, 2023. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Psychologic readiness for adult spinal deformity surgery: practical screening and optimization pathways.Spine deformity · 2026Review
- Does grit and self-control impact outcomes following spine surgery? Early findings from a prospective study evaluating the association between grit and self-control following minimally invasive laminectomy/microdiscectomy and anterior cervical surgery.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 · 2026Observational
- Valuable Prognostic Role of Disability, Pain, Anxiety, and Depression Scales in Instrumented Lumbar Spine Surgery for Degenerative Pathology: The SAP-LD Study.Brain sciences · 2025Article
- Do Psychological Factors Affect Life Satisfaction and Pain Interference in Spine Surgery Patients? A 12-Month Follow-Up Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe purpose of this review is to provide a brief history of previous attempts at developing patient screening tools and to further examine the definitions of these psychological concepts, relevance to clinical outcomes, and implications for spine surgeons during preoperative patient assessments.
methodsA literature review was performed by 2 independent researchers to identify original manuscripts related to spine surgery and novel psychological concepts. The history of presurgical psychology screening was also studied, and definitions of frequently utilized metrics were detailed.
resultsSeven manuscripts were identified that utilized psychological metrics for preoperative risk assessments and correlated outcomes with these scores. The metrics most frequently used in the literature included resilience, patient activation, grit, and self-efficacy. DISCUSSION: Current literature favors resilience and patient activation as important metrics for preoperative patient screening. Available studies demonstrate significant associations between these character traits and patient outcomes. Further research is warranted to investigate the roles of preoperative psychological screening to optimize patient selection in spine surgery. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The purpose of this review is to provide clinicians with a reference for available psychosocial screening tools and their relevance to patient selection. This review also serves to guide future research directions given the importance of this topic. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4:
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.