ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2025
Diagnostic accuracy and clinical utility of mTLICS versus TLICS and TL AOSIS in stratifying three-tier treatment for thoracolumbar injuries: focus on intermediate score range.
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.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThoracolumbar injury classification systems such as TLICS and TL AOSIS are widely implemented but offer limited guidance in intermediate score ranges (TLICS = 3-4), where treatment decisions are often uncertain. The modified TLICS (mTLICS) was developed to address this gap by integrating MRI-derived quantitative parameters.
methodsThis retrospective study included 146 adults with MRI-confirmed thoracolumbar spine injuries (T1-L5) treated at Phu Tho Provincial General Hospital between April 2024 and May 2025. Inclusion required MRI within 7 days of trauma and complete clinical data, including ASIA grade, VAS score, and treatment modality. All cases were classified using TLICS, TL AOSIS, and mTLICS, and managed conservatively, minimally invasively, or surgically. Predictive performance for treatment allocation was assessed using ROC analysis, multinomial logistic regression, and decision curve analysis (DCA).
resultsmTLICS showed the highest diagnostic accuracy across all treatment comparisons (AUC = 0.94-1.00), particularly in the intermediate-score group (TLICS = 3-4), with AUCs of 0.991 (conservative vs. surgical) and 0.965 (minimally invasive vs. surgical). Multinomial regression identified mTLICS as the sole independent predictor of treatment allocation (OR = 31.2-1338.4; p < 0.01), while TLICS and TL AOSIS were not statistically significant. DCA demonstrated the highest net clinical benefit for mTLICS, especially within the 0.3-0.6 threshold range.
conclusionsThe mTLICS demonstrated improved accuracy in stratifying thoracolumbar injuries across three treatment tiers and enhanced clarity in decision-making for intermediate cases. Its MRI-based components support personalized, image-guided management. Nonetheless, as clinicians at the study site were familiar with the mTLICS framework through prior academic exposure, potential incorporation bias cannot be entirely excluded. These findings should therefore be interpreted with caution, as mTLICS scores were calculated retrospectively after treatment completion and were not used prospectively to determine patient management, underscoring the need for prospective, multicenter validation to confirm its generalizability.
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.