ArticleClinical spine surgery2025
Recovery Trajectories of Patient-reported Outcomes After Surgery for Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: A Bayesian Latent Class Modeling Approach.
Article in Clinical spine surgery, 2025. 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.
- Identification, validation, and prediction of longitudinal recovery phenotypes in degenerative cervical myelopathy: analysis of prospective cohorts and a randomised controlled trial.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Article
- Association between perioperative patient-reported outcomes and upper extremity functional performance in degenerative cervical myelopathy.North American Spine Society journal · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
STUDY
designRetrospective study.
objectiveThe aim of this study was to identify recovery trajectory clusters after surgery for degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM), as well as to determine clinical and imaging characteristics associated with functional recovery trajectories.
backgroundAccurate prediction of postsurgical neurological recovery for the individual patient with DCM is challenging due to varying patterns of functional recovery. Latent class Bayesian models can model individual patient patterns and identify groups of patients with similar phenotypes for personalized prognostication.
methodsA prospective single-center study of 70 consecutive patients with DCM undergoing elective cervical spine decompression for DCM between 2010 and 2017 was performed. Outcomes were recorded using the modified Japanese Orthopedic Association (mJOA), Neck Disability Index (NDI), and the Short Form-36 Physical Component Score (SF-36 PCS) at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months. Recovery trajectories were constructed based on unsupervised Bayesian latent class modeling. Clinical and imaging predictors of recovery trajectories were also determined.
resultsRecovery after surgery for DCM showed 3 distinct recovery trajectory clusters for each outcome. The commonest recovery trajectory was sustained improvement for the mJOA (41.1%), stagnation for the NDI (60.3%), and stability for the SF-36 PCS (46.6%). Age, duration of symptoms, and baseline disability were the strongest predictors of each recovery trajectory. Degree of cord compression, neck pain, and intramedullary T2-hyperintensity were predictive of NDI and SF-36 PCS but not mJOA recovery trajectory. Sex was associated with the NDI recovery trajectory but not SF-36 PCS and mJOA recovery trajectories.
conclusionUsing prospective data and a data-driven approach, we identified 3 distinct recovery trajectory clusters and associated factors for mJOA, NDI, and SF-36 PCS in the first 24 months after surgery for DCM. Our results can enhance personalized clinical prognostication and guide patient expectations at different time points after surgery for DCM.
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.