ArticleScientific reports2025
Development and validation of a novel classification for characterizing degenerative spondylolisthesis of lumbar spine.
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
To performed classification based on global alignment and segmental balance, to better characterize single-segment Meyerding Grade I degenerative spondylolisthesis of lumbar spine (DSLS). A multicenter retrospective cohort study was performed, where 278 and 92 DSLS composed derivation and validation cohorts. Radiographical parameters contained lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic tilt (PT), sacral slope (SS) and sagittal vertical axis (SVA) and inflected and apical vertebrae. The quality-of life scales contained visual analog scales of low back pain (VAS-LBP) and leg pain (VAS-LP) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). The classification system was based on global alignment type and PI-LL: Type 1 and 2 with PI < 50°, while inflection < L2 in Type 1, Type 3 and 4 with PI ≥ 50°, while SS < 45° in Type 3; Subtype 2 A and 3 A with ideal PI-LL while 2B and 3B with unideal PI-LL. In derivation cohort, all DSLS acquired reduction and quality-of-life scales improved. At baseline, ODI and VAS-LBP was the highest in type 4, higher than type 3 and 1 (P = 0.030 and P = 0.041) but not for VAS-LP. In PI-LL subtype, ODI was worse in PI-LL mismatch subgroup in type 2 and 3 and VAS-LBP was worse in PI-LL mismatch subgroup in type 3 compared to match subgroup. All quality-of life scales were comparable among types. In validation cohort, there was 2 A-2B and 3 A-3B difference on ODI but comparable after surgery. The DSLS classification based on global shape (type 1-4) and PI-LL (A and B) was developed, where type 4 was linked to poor quality-of-life. This process broaden comprehensive analysis for DSLS.
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.