Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38304320›Full record

ArticleNorth American Spine Society journal2024

PROPOSE. Development and validation of a prediction model for shared decision making for patients with lumbar spinal stenosis.

Casper Friis Pedersen, Mikkel Østerheden Andersen, Leah Yacat Carreon, Simon Toftgaard Skov, Peter Doering, Søren Eiskjær

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in North American Spine Society journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Casper Friis PedersenCenter for Spine Surgery and Research, Spinecenter of Southern Denmark, Lillebaelt Hospital, Oestre Hougvej 55, DK-5500, Middelfart, Denmark.
Mikkel Østerheden AndersenUniversity of Southern Denmark, Center for Spine Surgery and Research, Spinecenter of Southern Denmark, Lillebaelt Hospital, Oestre Hougvej 55, DK-5500, Middelfart, Denmark.
Leah Yacat CarreonUniversity of Southern Denmark, Center for Spine Surgery and Research, Spinecenter of Southern Denmark, Lillebaelt Hospital, Oestre Hougvej 55, DK-5500, Middelfart, Denmark.
Simon Toftgaard SkovAarhus University, Elective Surgery Centre, Silkeborg Regional Hospital, Falkevej 3, DK-8600, Silkeborg, Denmark.
Peter DoeringDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Aalborg University, Hobrovej 18-22, DK-9000, Aalborg, Denmark.
Søren EiskjærDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Aalborg University, Hobrovej 18-22, DK-9000, Aalborg, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is the most frequently performed spine surgery in Denmark. According to the Danish spine registry DaneSpine, at 1 year after surgery, about 75% of patients experiences considerable pain relief and around 66% improvement in quality of life. However, 25% do not improve very much. We have developed a predictive decision support tool, PROPOSE. It is intended to be used in the clinical conversation between healthcare providers and LSS patients as a shared decision-making aid presenting pros and cons of surgical intervention. This study presents the development and evaluation of PROPOSE in a clinical setting. Methods: For model development, 6.357 LSS patients enrolled in DaneSpine were identified. For model validation, predictor response and predicted outcome was collected via PROPOSE from 228 patients. Observed outcome at 1 year was retrieved from DaneSpine. All participants were treated at 3 Danish spine centers. The outcome measures presented are improvement in walking distance, the Oswestry Disability Index, EQ-5D-3L and leg/back pain on the Visual Analog Scale. Outcome variables were dichotomized into success (1) and failure (0). With the exception of walking distance, a success was defined as reaching minimal clinically important difference at 1-year follow-up. Models were trained using Multivariate Adaptive Regression Splines. Performance was assessed by inspecting confusion matrix, ROC curves and comparing GCV (generalized cross-validation) errors. Final performance of the models was evaluated on independent test data. Results: The walking distance model demonstrated excellent performance with an AUC of 0.88 and a Brier score of 0.14. The VAS leg pain model had the lowest discriminatory performance with an AUC of 0.67 and a Brier score of 0.22. Conclusions: PROPOSE works in a real-world clinical setting as a proof of concept and demonstrates acceptable performance. It may have the potential of aiding shared decision making.

Indexed as

Lumbar decompression surgeryLumbar spinal stenosisPatient reported outcomePrediction modelShared decision-making

Identifiers

PMID38304320
PMCPMC10831309

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.