MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3011664963 · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1912658

Surgery versus Conservative Care for Persistent Sciatica Lasting 4 to 12 Months

2020· article· en· W3011664963 on OpenAlexafffund
Christopher S. Bailey, Parham Rasoulinejad, David C. Taylor, Keith Sequeira, Thomas A. Miller, Jim Watson, Richard Rosedale, Stewart I. Bailey, Kevin R. Gurr, Fawaz Siddiqi, Andrew Glennie, Jennifer Urquhart

Bibliographic record

VenueNew England Journal of Medicine · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
Canadian institutionsParkwood InstituteLondon Health Sciences CentreLawson Health Research InstituteWestern University
FundersPhysicians' Services Incorporated Foundation
KeywordsSciaticaMedicineDiskectomyConservative treatmentSurgeryConservative managementLumbarLumbar vertebrae

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The treatment of chronic sciatica caused by herniation of a lumbar disk has not been well studied in comparison with acute disk herniation. Data are needed on whether diskectomy or a conservative approach is better for sciatica that has persisted for several months. METHODS: In a single-center trial, we randomly assigned patients with sciatica that had lasted for 4 to 12 months and lumbar disk herniation at the L4-L5 or L5-S1 level in a 1:1 ratio to undergo microdiskectomy or to receive 6 months of standardized nonoperative care followed by surgery if needed. Surgery was performed by spine surgeons who used conventional microdiskectomy techniques. The primary outcome was the intensity of leg pain on a visual analogue scale (ranging from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating more severe pain) at 6 months after enrollment. Secondary outcomes were the score on the Oswestry Disability Index, back and leg pain, and quality-of-life scores at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year. RESULTS: From 2010 through 2016, a total of 790 patients were screened; of those patients, 128 were enrolled, with 64 in each group. Among the patients assigned to undergo surgery, the median time from randomization to surgery was 3.1 weeks; of the 64 patients in the nonsurgical group, 22 (34%) crossed over to undergo surgery at a median of 11 months after enrollment. At baseline, the mean score for leg-pain intensity was 7.7 in the surgical group and 8.0 in the nonsurgical group. The primary outcome of the leg-pain intensity score at 6 months was 2.8 in the surgical group and 5.2 in the nonsurgical group (adjusted mean difference, 2.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.4 to 3.4; P<0.001). Secondary outcomes including the score on the Owestry Disability Index and pain at 12 months were in the same direction as the primary outcome. Nine patients had adverse events associated with surgery, and one patient underwent repeat surgery for recurrent disk herniation. CONCLUSIONS: In this single-center trial involving patients with sciatica lasting more than 4 months and caused by lumbar disk herniation, microdiskectomy was superior to nonsurgical care with respect to pain intensity at 6 months of follow-up. (Funded by Physicians' Services Incorporated Foundation; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01335646.).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations213
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew England Journal of MedicineSame topicSpine and Intervertebral Disc PathologyFrench-language works237,207