ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2025
Odontoid parameters in subjects with and without degenerative cervical spondylosis.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Radiological differences between patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy according to different levels of maximum compression.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to explore radiographic differences in odontoid parameters between subjects with and without degenerative cervical spondylosis (DCS).
methodsLateral cervical X-rays and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) from 51 healthy subjects (control group) and 107 DCS patients (case group) were retrospectively reviewed. The odontoid parameters including odontoid incidence (OI), odontoid tilt (OT), and related cervical sagittal parameters were measured: C2 slope (C2S), C0-2 angle (C0-2), C2-7 angle (cervical lordosis [CL]), T1 slope (T1S), and T1S minus cervical lordosis (T1S - CL). An independent-samples t test and the Wilcoxon rank-sum test were used to compare these parameters between the two groups. Spearman's correlation analysis assessed the correlations among these parameters. The formula CL = 0.36 × OI - 0.67 × OT - 0.69 × T1S was used to predict CL and confirm its efficacy.
resultsThe OI and OT were 15.67° ± 4.41° and 9.42° ± 4.66° in healthy subjects and 18.84° ± 3.41° and 4.47° ± 5.93° in DCS patients, with significant differences observed between the two groups (p < 0.001). In healthy subjects and DCS patients, OI and OT were correlated with C2S, C0-2, C2-7, and T1S - CL. The formula for predicting CL had predictive efficacy in healthy subjects (R
conclusionsOI and OT serve as valuable supplements to the established parameters for evaluating and predicting normal cervical lordosis, aiding in assessing cervical spine balance and guiding therapeutic strategies to restore it.
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.