MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2069048090 · doi:10.1097/brs.0b013e318240d57d

Nonoperative Treatment of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis With Neurogenic Claudication

2011· review· en· W2069048090 on OpenAlexaff
Carlo Ammendolia, Kent Stuber, Linda K. de Bruin, Andrea D Furlan, Carol Kennedy, Y. Raja Rampersaud, Ivan Steenstra, Victoria Pennick

Bibliographic record

VenueSpine · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
Canadian institutionsToronto Rehabilitation InstituteCanadian Memorial Chiropractic CollegeUniversity of TorontoInstitute for Work & HealthMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNeurogenic claudicationLumbar spinal stenosisPhysical therapyRandomized controlled trialPlaceboQuality of life (healthcare)ClaudicationIntermittent claudicationEvidence-based medicineGabapentinSpinal stenosisCINAHLSurgeryLumbarVascular diseaseAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Brief Study Design. Systematic review. Objective. To systematically review the evidence for the effectiveness of nonoperative treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis with neurogenic claudication. Summary of Background Data. Neurogenic claudication can significantly impact functional ability, quality of life, and independence in the elderly. Methods. We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and ICL databases up to January 2011 for randomized controlled trials published in English, in which at least 1 arm provided data on nonoperative treatments. Risk of bias in each study was independently assessed by 2 reviewers using 12 criteria. Quality of the evidence was evaluated using Grades of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). Results. From the 8635 citations screened, 56 were assessed and 21 trials with 1851 participants were selected. There is very low-quality evidence from 6 trials that calcitonin is no better than placebo or paracetamol, regardless of mode of administration or outcome. From single small trials, there is low-quality evidence that prostaglandins, and very low-quality evidence that gabapentin or methylcobalamin, improve walking distance. There is very low-quality evidence from a single trial that epidural steroid injections improve pain, function, and quality of life up to 2 weeks compared with home exercise or inpatient physical therapy. There is low-quality evidence from a single trial that exercise is of short-term benefit for leg pain and function compared with no treatment. There is low- and very low-quality evidence from 6 trials that multimodal nonoperative treatment is less effective than indirect or direct surgical decompression with or without fusion. Conclusion. Moderate- and high-GRADE evidence for nonoperative treatment is lacking and thus prohibiting recommendations to guide clinical practice. Given the expected exponential rise in the prevalence of lumbar spinal stenosis with neurogenic claudication, large high-quality trials are urgently needed. Low- and very low-quality evidence suggests that for neurogenic claudication, prostaglandins, gabapentin, and methylcobalamin improve walking ability; exercise improves leg pain and function; calcitonin is no better than placebo or paracetamol; epidural injections provide short-term improvement in pain, function, and quality of life; and indirect and direct surgical decompressions are more effective than multimodal nonoperative care.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.868

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.106
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.271 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations113
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpineSame topicSpine and Intervertebral Disc PathologyFrench-language works237,207