ArticlePLoS medicine2024
A minimum data set-Core outcome set, core data elements, and core measurement set-For degenerative cervical myelopathy research (AO Spine RECODE DCM): A consensus study.
Article in PLoS medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07641699 (A Multicenter Registry-Based Study of Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy Across the Full Disease Spectrum Based on a Disease-Specific Registry Platform and Linked Biobank), which is not on this map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
A Multicenter Registry-Based Study of Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy Across the Full Disease Spectrum Based on a Disease-Specific Registry Platform and Linked Biobank
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Rehabilitation for degenerative cervical myelopathy: systematic review and scoping review of UK patient information.Spinal cord · 2025Pooled it
- Toward the Optimal Way to Assess Symptomatic Fatigue in Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: Mixed Methods Survey Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Longitudinal Evidence on Natural History, Nonoperative Management, and Multimodal Surveillance in Mild to Moderate Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: A Scoping Review.Global spine journal · 2026Review
- Identification, validation, and prediction of longitudinal recovery phenotypes in degenerative cervical myelopathy: analysis of prospective cohorts and a randomised controlled trial.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Article
- Enhanced measures to quantify gait and balance impairment in degenerative cervical myelopathy: A prospective cohort study.North American Spine Society journal · 2026Article
- Response to Letter to the Editor: Comment on "Psychometric Performance of Clinician- and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Surgically Treated Thoracic Myelopathy: A Multicenter Prospective Study".Global spine journal · 2026Article
- Comment on "Psychometric Performance of Clinician- and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Surgically Treated Thoracic Myelopathy: A Multicenter Prospective Study".Global spine journal · 2026Article
- ReMiDY (rehabilitation in mild stable degenerative cervical myelopathy): protocol for feasibility randomized controlled trial.Spinal cord · 2026Article
- AI-assisted thematic synthesis of existing neurological core outcome sets: A descriptive reference framework (COS-Neuro).PloS one · 2026Article
- Towards a common core dataset for critical care: a registry-centered vision for global improvement.Critical care science · 2026Article
- Development of a core outcome set and core measurement set for kangaroo mother care: a study protocol.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Yishenyangsui granule for degenerative cervical myelopathy: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with long-term follow-up.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Spine endoscopic surgery establishment for disc disease (Neurocore-SENSED): an open and decentralized consensus.Brain & spine · 2025Article
- Duration of symptoms before diagnosis in degenerative cervical myelopathy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Brain & spine · 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
43 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDegenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is a progressive chronic spinal cord injury estimated to affect 1 in 50 adults. Without standardised guidance, clinical research studies have selected outcomes at their discretion, often underrepresenting the disease and limiting comparability between studies. Utilising a standard minimum data set formed via multi-stakeholder consensus can address these issues. This combines processes to define a core outcome set (COS)-a list of key outcomes-and core data elements (CDEs), a list of key sampling characteristics required to interpret the outcomes. Further "how" these outcomes should be measured and/or reported is then defined in a core measurement set (CMS). This can include a recommendation of a standardised time point at which outcome data should be reported. This study defines a COS, CDE, and CMS for DCM research. METHODS AND
findingsA minimum data set was developed using a series of modified Delphi processes. Phase 1 involved the setup of an international DCM stakeholder group. Phase 2 involved the development of a longlist of outcomes, data elements, and formation into domains. Phase 3 prioritised the outcomes and CDEs using a two-stage Delphi process. Phase 4 determined the final DCM minimal data set using a consensus meeting. Using the COS, Phase 5 finalised definitions of the measurement construct for each outcome. In Phase 6, a systematic review of the literature was performed, to scope and define the psychometric properties of measurement tools. Phase 7 used a modified Delphi process to inform the short-listing of candidate measurement tools. The final measurement set was then formed through a consensus meeting (Phase 8). To support implementation, the data set was then integrated into template clinical research forms (CRFs) for use in future clinical trials (Phase 9). In total, 28 outcomes and 6 domains (Pain, Neurological Function, Life Impact, Radiology, Economic Impact, and Adverse Events) were entered into the final COS. Thirty two outcomes and 4 domains (Individual, Disease, Investigation, and Intervention) were entered into the final CDE. Finally, 4 outcome instruments (mJOA, NDI, SF-36v2, and SAVES2) were identified for the CMS, with a recommendation for trials evaluating outcomes after surgery, to include baseline measurement and at 6 months from surgery.
conclusionsThe AO Spine RECODE-DCM has produced a minimum data set for use in DCM clinical trials today. These are available at https://myelopathy.org/minimum-dataset/. While it is anticipated the CDE and COS have strong and durable relevance, it is acknowledged that new measurement tools, alongside an increasing transition to study patients not undergoing surgery, may necessitate updates and adaptation, particularly with respect to the CMS.
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.