A Clinical Prediction Rule for Functional Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Surgery for Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) is a progressive spinal condition that is often managed surgically. Knowledge of important predictors of surgical outcome can provide decision support to surgeons and enable them to effectively manage their patients' expectations. The purpose of this study was to identify the most important clinical predictors of surgical outcome in patients with CSM using data from two multinational prospective studies. METHODS: A total of 757 patients treated surgically for CSM participated in either the CSM-North America or the CSM-International study. The model was designed to distinguish between patients who achieved a modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) score of ≥16 at the one-year follow-up and those who did not (mJOA < 16). A score of 16 was chosen as the cutoff as an mJOA of ≥16 translates to minimal impairment. Univariate analyses evaluated the relationship between outcome and various clinical predictors. Multivariate Poisson regression was used to create the final prediction rule and estimate relative risks. RESULTS: Based on univariate analyses, the probability of achieving a score of ≥16 decreased with the presence of certain symptoms, including gait dysfunction, the presence of certain signs such as lower limb spasticity, positive smoking status, higher comorbidity score, more severe preoperative myelopathy, and older age. The final model consisted of six significant and clinically relevant predictors: baseline severity score (relative risk [RR], 1.11; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07 to 1.15), impaired gait (RR, 0.76 [ref. = absence]; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.88), age (RR, 0.91 per decade; 95% CI, 0.85 to 0.96), comorbidity score (RR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.88 to 0.98), smoking status (RR, 0.78 [ref. = non-smoking]; 95% CI, 0.65 to 0.93), and duration of symptoms (RR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.90 to 0.99). CONCLUSIONS: Patients were more likely to achieve a score of ≥16 (indicating minimal impairment) if they were younger, had milder preoperative myelopathy, did not smoke, had fewer and less severe comorbidities, did not present with impaired gait, and had shorter symptom duration.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.043 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".