ArticleAsian spine journal2025
The 3-kilogram weight-lifting flexion radiograph: a new diagnostic method for segmental sagittal lumbar instability: a cross-sectional study.
Article in Asian spine journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Review
- Clinical Significance of Difference in Lumbar Lordosis (DiLL) as a Dynamic Spinal Alignment Parameter: A Narrative Review.Spine surgery and related research · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
STUDY
designA cross-sectional study. PURPOSE: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of a novel 3-kg weight-lifting flexion radiograph for detecting lumbar instability. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: Conventional flexion-extension radiographs have limited sensitivity for detecting lumbar instability, while magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a reliable standard. This study compares the performance of a novel weight-lifting radiograph to conventional flexion radiographs, using MRI as the reference standard.
methodsForty-six patients with a diagnosis of lumbar instability were enrolled. Participants underwent lateral flexion, lateral extension, and 3-kg weight-lifting flexion lumbosacral spine radiographs. MRI was also performed on all participants. Diagnostic parameters, including sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, accuracy, and likelihood ratios, were calculated for each lumbar level. Reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs).
resultsThe 3-kg weight-lifting flexion radiograph showed higher sensitivity for detecting spinal instability at the L3/4 and L4/5 levels (88% vs. 36% and 83.3% vs. 44.44%, respectively) but lower specificity (61.9% vs. 76.19% and 70% vs. 80%, respectively) compared to the conventional flexion radiograph. McNemar tests revealed no significant differences between the 3-kg weight-lifting flexion radiograph and MRI at these levels (p >0.05). Reliability assessments demonstrated excellent intra- and interobserver agreement (ICC ≥0.99). Furthermore, this technique was safe, with no adverse effects reported.
conclusionsThe 3-kg weight-lifting flexion radiograph enhances diagnostic sensitivity and accuracy for lumbar instability, particularly at the L3/4 and L4/5 levels, offering a reliable screening alternative.
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.