A partial least squares analysis of functional status, disability, and quality of life after surgical decompression for degenerative cervical myelopathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous studies aimed at identifying predictors of clinical outcomes following surgical decompression for degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) are limited by multicollinearity among predictors, whereby the high degree of correlation between covariates precludes detection of potentially significant findings. We apply partial least squares (PLS), a data-driven approach, to model multi-dimensional variance and dissociate patient phenotypes associated with functional, disability, and quality of life (QOL) outcomes in DCM. This was a post-hoc analysis of DCM patients enrolled in the prospective, multi-center AOSpine CSM-NA/CSM-I studies. Baseline clinical covariates evaluated as predictors included demographic (e.g., age, sex), clinical presentation (e.g., signs and symptoms), and treatment (e.g., surgical approach) characteristics. Outcomes evaluated included change in functional status (∆mJOA), disability (∆NDI), and QOL (∆SF-36) at 2 years. PLS was used to derive latent variables (LVs) relating specific clinical covariates with specific outcomes. Statistical significance was estimated using bootstrapping. Four hundred and seventy-eight patients met eligibility criteria. PLS identified 3 significant LVs. LV1 indicated an association between presentation with hand muscle atrophy, treatment by an approach other than laminectomy alone, and greater improvement in physical health-related QOL outcomes (e.g., SF-36 Physical Component Summary). LV2 suggested the presence of comorbidities (respiratory, rheumatologic, psychological) was associated with lesser improvements in functional status post-operatively (i.e., mJOA score). Finally, LV3 reflected an association between more severe myelopathy presenting with gait impairment and poorer mental health-related QOL outcomes (e.g., SF-36 Mental Component Summary). Using PLS, this analysis uncovered several novel insights pertaining to patients undergoing surgical decompression for DCM that warrant further investigation: (1) comorbid status and frailty heavily impact functional outcome; (2) presentation with hand muscle atrophy is associated with better physical QOL outcomes; and (3) more severe myelopathy with gait impairment is associated with poorer mental QOL outcomes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".