ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2025
Letter to the editor concerning "Efficacy of two opportunistic methods for screening osteoporosis in lumbar spine surgery patients" by T.-T. Xu, et al. (Eur Spine J [2023]: doi: 10.1007/s00586-023-07938-4).
Article in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo write a letter to editors concerning "Efficacy of two opportunistic methods for screening osteoporosis in lumbar spine surgery patients" by T.-T. Xu, et al. (Eur Spine J [2023]: doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-023-07938-4 ). We try to compare the target article with similar articles.
methodsCompared the target article with similar articles.
resultsThe mentioned target article and the contrasting articles had similar research design and objectives, but they came to completely different results. The ways of calculating the lumbar VBQ score were similar to those previously published. However, the large variations in threshold values of the VBQ should be assessed carefully again before interpreting, either in methodology or variations resulted from other factors.
conclusionWe advised the authors of the targeted article to interpret and analyze their research again the calculation of lumbar VBQ to possibly explain the large variations of the VBQ scores.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40931130What 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.