ArticleBMJ open2023
Secondary analysis of a James Lind Alliance priority setting partnership to facilitate knowledge translation in degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM): insights from AO Spine RECODE-DCM.
Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of chemical prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism after degenerative spine surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Asian spine journal · 2025Article
- The AO Spine Knowledge Forums: A Decade of Impactful Spine Research.Global spine journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors at 13 institutions in 6 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo explore whether a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership could provide insights on knowledge translation within the field of degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM).
designSecondary analysis of a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership process for DCM. PARTICIPANTS AND
settingDCM stake holders, including spinal surgeons, people with myelopathy and other healthcare professionals, were surveyed internationally. Research suggestions submitted by stakeholders but considered answered were identified. Sampling characteristics of respondents were compared with the overall cohort to identify subgroups underserved by current knowledge translation.
resultsThe survey was completed by 423 individuals from 68 different countries. A total of 22% of participants submitted research suggestions that were considered 'answered'. There was a significant difference between responses from different stakeholder groups (p<0.005). Spinal surgeons were the group which was most likely to submit an 'answered' research question. Respondents from South America were also most likely to submit 'answered' questions, when compared with other regions. However, there was no significant difference between responses from different stakeholder regions (p=0.4).
conclusionsKnowledge translation challenges exist within DCM. This practical approach to measuring knowledge translation may offer a more responsive assessment to guide interventions, complementing existing metrics.
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.