ArticleScientific reports2024
Screening patients requiring secondary lumbar surgery for degenerative lumbar spine diseases: a nationwide sample cohort study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study aims to identify healthcare costs indicators predicting secondary surgery for degenerative lumbar spine disease (DLSD), which significantly impacts healthcare budgets. Analyzing data from the National Health Insurance Service-National Sample Cohort (NHIS-NSC) database of Republic of Korea (ROK), the study included 3881 patients who had surgery for lumbar disc herniation (LDH), lumbar spinal stenosis without spondylolisthesis (LSS without SPL), lumbar spinal stenosis with spondylolisthesis (LSS with SPL), and spondylolysis (SP) from 2006 to 2008. Patients were categorized into two groups: those undergoing secondary surgery (S-group) and those not (NS-group). Surgical and interim costs were compared, with S-group having higher secondary surgery costs ($1829.59 vs $1618.40 in NS-group, P = 0.002) and higher interim costs ($30.03; 1.86% of initial surgery costs vs $16.09; 0.99% of initial surgery costs in NS-group, P < 0.0001). The same trend was observed in LDH, LSS without SPL, and LSS with SPL (P < 0.0001). Monitoring interim costs trends post-initial surgery can effectively identify patients requiring secondary surgery.
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.