ArticleMuscle & nerve2026
Healthcare Provider Perspectives of Various Signs and Symptoms for Diagnosing Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: Results of an International, Multidisciplinary Survey.
Article in Muscle & nerve, 2026. 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.
- Healthcare Provider Perspectives of Various Signs and Symptoms for Diagnosing Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: Results of an International, Multidisciplinary Survey.Muscle & nerve · 2026Article
- Patient-reported outcomes following anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion versus laminectomy for degenerative cervical myelopathy: analyses of a national multicenter dataset.Brain & spine · 2026Article
- Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and degenerative cervical myelopathy: phenotype-based diagnostic pitfalls, investigative mismatch, and practical clinical reasoning.Frontiers in neurology · 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
36 authors.
Funding
Abstract
INTRODUCTION/
aimsDiagnosis of degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is frequently delayed. A lack of awareness and standardized screening criteria have been identified as major contributors. The objective of this study was to conduct a survey of international experts to determine the value of various signs and symptoms in diagnosing patients with DCM. This study forms part of a three-step initiative that aims to develop pragmatic screening criteria for DCM.
methodsAn open voluntary English-language Likert scale survey was disseminated among international networks of experts in DCM. Respondents were asked to rank each sign or symptom on a scale of 0 (not important at all) to 10 (extremely important); a mean value of ≥ 6.5 was set a priori as the threshold to consider a feature as having significant diagnostic value.
resultsFifteen symptoms and 12 signs were ranked as having significant diagnostic value. The most highly ranked symptoms are primarily related to abnormalities of the upper limb, hand function, and gait. The top-rated signs included pathological reflexes as well as impairment of motor function, gait, and coordination. Features ranked as significant were largely consistent across professions, levels of experience, and continental regions. DISCUSSION: The integration of expert stakeholder opinion with evidence from existing literature strengthens the clinical framework for identifying key clinical features of DCM. These 27 features will be discussed at an international consensus meeting to establish a standardized clinical screening toolkit that can be used by frontline healthcare professionals to detect patients with DCM.
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.