ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2024
Developmental cervical spinal canal size: population reference range.
Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2024. 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.
- Development of a predictive model for postoperative erectile function recovery in male patients with incomplete traumatic cervical spinal cord injury.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 · 2026Article
- Clinical implications of distribution-based CT thresholds in congenital cervical stenosis.Surgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The developmental size of the cervical spinal canal varies considerably. Neural compression and injury are more likely with a developmentally small spinal canal. This study was designed to develop a population reference range for developmental cervical spinal canal size for the Hong Kong population. Methods: Prospective study of 522 ambulatory patients (256 males, 266 females, mean age 55±18 years; range, 20-89 years) who underwent computed tomography (CT) neck examinations. Using a manually operated segmentation program, spinal canal, and vertebral body cross-sectional area (CSA), anteroposterior (AP) sagittal diameter, and width were measured at each level from C3-C7. Patient height and weight were measured. Results: Considerable variation in spinal canal size existed with, for example, a 164-168% variation exists for males and females between the largest and smallest spinal canal CSA at C5. All spinal canal measurements increased slightly with height (r=0.25-0.36, P<0.001), while vertebral body AP sagittal diameter increased with age (r=0.48-0.51, P<0.001). All spinal canal measurements were larger (<0.0001) in males. Although spinal canal CSA was larger in males (at C5, males 276.0±41.5 mm Conclusions: There is a large variation in developmental cervical spinal canal size within the Hong Kong population. A reference range of developmental spinal canal size was developed which will enable an objective assessment of an individual's cervical spinal canal size relative to the wider population.
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.