ArticleThe neuroradiology journal2023
Time for change? Radiologists highly concordant assessing change in stenoses on follow-up cervical spine MRI.
Article in The neuroradiology journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
objectiveThere is considerable variability among radiologists when grading spinal canal and foraminal stenosis on MRI. However, to date, studies have not evaluated radiologists' agreement when assessing interval change in cervical spine stenoses. The purpose of this study was to evaluate radiologists' concordance for change in cervical spine stenoses on follow-up MRIs, a major indication for these exams.
methodsInitial and follow-up cervical MRIs were retrospectively reviewed by three blinded radiologists. Spinal canal and foramina from C1 through T1 were rated for interval change and concordance between the blinded raters was calculated. The original MRI reports were also reviewed for specific language assessing interval change on the follow-up exams.
results40 cervical MRI exams and 40 corresponding MRI follow-ups were assessed. Agreement for interval change in spinal canal and foraminal stenosis was near perfect amongst all readers (kappa values of 0.78-0.94). 97% of the original MRI reports used the standard severity scale. 68% of follow-up MRI reports specifically assessed for change. DISCUSSION: Blinded radiologists had high agreement when assessing for change in spinal canal and foraminal stenosis on follow-up cervical spine MRIs. Because of inter-rater variability in stenosis grading, reports that do not emphasize change assessment, may imply change that is not truly present. For clarity and consistency in reporting of cervical spine stenoses, change assessment should be emphasized and added to structured reporting templates.
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.