Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38700676›Full record

SynthesisArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2024

The Fragility of Statistical Findings in Cervical Disc Arthroplasty: a Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Emmanuel C Megafu, Michael N Megafu, Janet T Nguyen, Elisabeth Point Du Jour, Wesley H Bronson, James D Lin, Andrew C Hecht, Robert L Parisien

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. 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

8 authors.

Emmanuel C MegafuGeisinger Commonwealth School of Medicine, Scranton, PA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7727-7054
Michael N MegafuA.T. Still University, Kirksville College of Osteopathic Medicine, Kirksville, MO, USA. Michael.Megafu@atsu.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4215-2144
Janet T NguyenGeisinger Commonwealth School of Medicine, Scranton, PA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6176-2939
Elisabeth Point Du JourGeisinger Commonwealth School of Medicine, Scranton, PA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0008-4727-9527
Wesley H BronsonDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Mount Sinai Hospital, New York, NY, USA.
James D LinDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Mount Sinai Hospital, New York, NY, USA.
Andrew C HechtDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Mount Sinai Hospital, New York, NY, USA.
Robert L ParisienDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Mount Sinai Hospital, New York, NY, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7562-8375

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis study employs both the fragility index (FI) and fragility quotient (FQ) to assess the level of robustness in the cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) literature. We hypothesize that dichotomous outcomes involving CDA would exhibit statistical vulnerability.

methodsA PubMed search was conducted to evaluate dichotomous data for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in CDA literature from 2000 to 2023. The FI of each outcome was calculated through the reversal of a single outcome event until significance was reversed. The FQ was calculated by dividing each fragility index by the study sample size. The interquartile range (IQR) was also calculated for the FI and FQ.

resultsOf the 1561 articles screened, 111 met the search criteria, with 35 RCTs evaluating CDA included for analysis. Six hundred and ninety-three outcome events with 130 significant (P < 0.05) outcomes and 563 nonsignificant (P ≥ 0.05) outcomes were identified. The overall FI and FQ for all 693 outcomes were 5 (IQR 3-7) and 0.019 (IQR 0.011-0.043). Fragility analysis of statistically significant outcomes and nonsignificant outcomes both revealed an FI of 5. All of the studies reported loss to follow-up (LTF) data where 65.7% (23) did not report or reported an LTF greater or equal to 5.

conclusionsThe literature regarding CDA RCTs lacks statistical robustness and may misrepresent the conclusions with the sole use of the P value. By implementing the FI and FQ along with the P value, we believe the interpretation and contextualization of the clinical data surrounding CDA will be better understood.

Indexed as

Cervical VertebraeRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicArthroplastyData Interpretation, StatisticalHumansIntervertebral Disc DegenerationTotal Disc ReplacementCervical disc arthroplastyFragility indexFragility quotientRandomized controlled trialsStatistical fragility

Identifiers

PMID38700676
PMCPMC11211173

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.