ArticleIndian journal of orthopaedics2024
Comparison of Global Alignment and Proportion (GAP) Score and SRS-Schwab ASD Classification in the Analysis of Surgical Outcomes for Adult Spinal Deformity.
Article in Indian journal of orthopaedics, 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.
- Association of the GAP score and roussouly-based algorithm with long-term patient-reported outcomes following adult spinal deformity surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.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 · 2026Review
- The predictive value of the global alignment and proportion (GAP) score for mechanical complications following adult spinal deformity surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis.North American Spine Society journal · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Study design: The GAP score predicted post-operative mechanical complications more effectively whereas SRS-Schwab classification improved evaluation of postoperative PROMs. Objective: The study compared the GAP Score and SRS-Schwab Classification in predicting surgical outcomes for adult spinal deformity (ASD) and elucidated whether both systems should be included in the preoperative planning. Materials and methods: Radiographic measurements and health-related quality of life scores at baseline, 6 weeks after surgery, and the last follow-up were collected from a cohort of 69 ASD patients subjected to long segment spinal fusion surgery after they were grouped by GAP score and SRS-Schwab classification respectively. Fisher's exact test and receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to compare the incidence of mechanical complications and the discriminant capacity during revision surgery between the two groups. Postoperative patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) were compared by one-way ANOVA, and the proportions of MCID achieved for PROMs compared by chi-square test between the two groups. Results: The overall incidence of mechanical complications and revision surgery were 42% and 8.7%. Both GAP score and its categories predicted mechanical complications and revision surgery, but the GAP score system could not predict the improvements of PROMs. The SRS-Schwab classification could predict the occurrence of postoperative mechanical complications and improvements of postoperative PROMs between the aligned, moderately misaligned and severely misaligned groups (P < 0.05). Conclusion: Hence, a comprehensive surgical strategy for postoperative planning may improve patients' quality of life and minimize mechanical complications. Graphical Abstract:
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.