ArticleScientific reports2025
A comparison of conventional intervention and home-based approach with head-mounted device for cervical spondylotic myelopathy after surgery.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) is rising in the aging population. This study evaluated conventional versus home-based exercise interventions with a head-mounted device in 75 patients. Participants were divided into conventional (N = 36) and home-based (N = 39) groups, assessed pre-surgery, 3-months post-surgery, and after an eight-week intervention. Outcomes included numeric pain rating scale (NRS), neck disability index (NDI), cervical spine range of motion (ROM), neck muscle strength, muscle activation during movement, and cervical proprioception. A two-way mixed ANOVA was used to explore the main effects and interactions between groups and time points. ANCOVA adjusted for potential baseline differences. Both groups improved in NRS (P = 0.003), NDI (P = 0.001), and ROM in flexion (P < 0.001) and extension (P < 0.001) after exercise, while the home-based group showed significantly greater ROM in rotation (left, P = 0.026; right, P = 0.006), greater muscle strength (flexors, P < 0.001; extensors, P < 0.001), and lower sternocleidomastoid muscle activation (P < 0.001). The home-based group exhibited lower reposition errors post-exercise than the conventional group (Variable error during extension, P < 0.001; root mean square error during flexion, left and right rotation, P < 0.001 for all). The home-based intervention with a head-mounted device showed superior outcomes in mobility, muscle strength, proprioception, and muscle activation, surpassing pre-surgery levels and enhancing quality of life for CSM patients.
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.