ArticleCureus2026
A Nationwide Survey of the Spine Education of Medical Students.
Article in Cureus, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Spinal disease is prevalent, yet education regarding these disorders in undergraduate medical education is limited. Objective This study assesses medical students' exposure, confidence, competence, and attitudes regarding their spine anatomy and pathology curricula. Methods US allopathic and osteopathic medical students completed an anonymous, uncompensated survey, including 17 questions on attitudes towards spine education and 15 on spine anatomy and pathology. Surveys completed in <180 seconds or <80% complete were excluded. Students estimated their hours of spine education and rated their comfort in diagnosing spine pathology. Data was analyzed using Stata (StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA) and RStudio (Posit PBC, Boston, MA, USA). Results Of 491 survey respondents, 252 (51.2% allopathic, 48.8% osteopathic) met the inclusion criteria. Surgery and medicine were the most common specialty interests. Students scored significantly higher in lumbar competence (2.20 vs. 1.96; p<0.001, F = 7.40) and confidence (1.72 vs. 0.82; p<0.001, F = 38.66) questions than in cervical spine. Students who reported over 20 hours of spine anatomy teaching answered more lumbar spine questions correctly and reported more confidence answering both cervical and lumbar spine questions. Students with reported interest in either neurosurgery or orthopedics had a non-significant trend to answer more questions correctly overall but were significantly more confident with cervical spine questions (p=0.02, x
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.