Change in Functional Impairment, Disability, and Quality of Life Following Operative Treatment for Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of this systematic review was to define the change in impairment, disability, and pain following surgical intervention in patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM). Secondary objectives included to assess the impact of preoperative disease severity and duration of symptoms on outcomes and to summarize complications associated with surgery. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted to identify prospective studies evaluating the effectiveness and safety of operative treatment in patients with DCM. Outcomes of interest were functional status, disability, pain, and complications. The quality of each study was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and the strength of the overall body of evidence was rated using guidelines outlined by the Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group. RESULTS: Of the 385 retrieved citations, 32 met inclusion criteria and are summarized in this review. Based on our results, pooled standard mean differences showed a large effect for improvement in Japanese Orthopaedic Association or modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association score from baseline at short-, medium-, and long-term follow-up: 6 to 12 months (1.92; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.41 to 2.43), 13 to 36 months (1.40; 95% CI = 1.12 to 1.67), and ≥36 months (1.92; 95% CI = 1.14 to 2.69) (moderate evidence). Surgery also resulted in significant improvements in Nurick, Neck Disability Index, and Visual Analogue Scale scores (low to very low evidence). The cumulative incidence of complications was low (14.1%; 95% CI = 10.1% to 18.2%). CONCLUSION: Surgical intervention for DCM results in significant improvements in functional impairment, disability, and pain and is associated with an acceptably low rate of complications.
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 | 0.016 | 0.046 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.020 | 0.033 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".