ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2026
Machine learning prediction of surgical approach and clinical heterogeneity in cervical spondylotic myelopathy.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPreoperative planning of the surgical approach for cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) is central to precision medicine. This study used supervised machine learning (SML) to build a predictive model for surgical approach selection in CSM and applied unsupervised machine learning (UML) to explore clinical heterogeneity.
methodsIn this retrospective study, a development cohort of 884 surgically treated patients with CSM was used for model development after exclusion of patients with incomplete perioperative data. Variables showing significant between-group differences were entered into four supervised machine-learning algorithms, including support vector machine (SVM), extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), random forest (RF), and generalized linear model (GLM), for feature screening and model development. In addition, an exploratory unsupervised clustering analysis was performed in patients undergoing anterior surgery on the basis of perioperative profile variables to characterize clinical heterogeneity. An independent external validation cohort of 200 patients was further used to evaluate the discrimination, calibration, and clinical utility of the final model.
resultsThe final prediction model for surgical approach incorporated four key variables: American Spinal Injury Association impairment scale (ASIA), eosinophils (EOS), total protein (TP), and albumin (Alb), with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.811 in the development cohort. Model scores were significantly correlated with perioperative indicators. UML identified two exploratory subgroups among patients receiving anterior surgery, indicating distinct perioperative profiles. In the external validation cohort, the model achieved an AUC of 0.726 (95% CI 0.615-0.828), with acceptable calibration and potential clinical net benefit on decision curve analysis.
conclusionsASIA, EOS, TP, and Alb were identified as variables associated with surgical approach selection in patients with CSM. The internally derived model showed promising discriminative ability and retained moderate performance in an independent external validation cohort. In addition, exploratory unsupervised clustering suggested the presence of distinct perioperative profiles among patients undergoing anterior surgery. These findings provide preliminary support for the potential transportability of the model, although further prospective multicenter validation remains necessary.
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.