ArticleEinstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil)2025
Intra- and inter-observer reliabilities of cervical sagittal radiographic measurements among evaluators with different levels of training.
Article in Einstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil), 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the intra- and inter-observer reliabilities of cervical sagittal radiographic measurements performed by evaluators with varying levels of clinical experience.
methodsThis study analyzed lateral cervical radiographs from 14 patients who had undergone single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Four evaluators, a spine surgeon, radiologist, spine surgery resident, and medical student, measured five sagittal alignment parameters (C2-C7 Cobb angle, T1 slope, cervical sagittal vertical axis, cervical sagittal vertical axis via C-shape, and T1- C2-C7 Cobb angle). Intra-observer variability was calculated as the deviation from the median measurements. Inter-observer reliability was assessed using intra-class correlation coefficients.
resultsIntra-observer variability was lowest among experienced evaluators (13% for both the spine surgeon and radiologist) and highest for the medical student (19.4%). The intra-class correlation coefficients ranged from 0.54 to 0.96, indicating moderate to excellent agreement. When only the two most experienced evaluators were included in the analysis, intra-class correlation coefficients exceeded 0.88 for all parameters.
conclusionObserver experience significantly influences the reliability of sagittal cervical radiographic measurements. Although less experienced evaluators demonstrate higher variability, their performance remains within acceptable limits. Standardized training protocols may help improve consistency across different levels of expertise.
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.