MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205903601 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-057650

Clinical outcome measures and their evidence base in degenerative cervical myelopathy: a systematic review to inform a core measurement set (AO Spine RECODE-DCM)

2022· review· en· W4205903601 on OpenAlexaff
Alvaro Yanez Touzet, Aniqah Bhatti, Esmee Dohle, Faheem Bhatti, Keng Siang Lee, Julio C. Furlan, Michael G. Fehlings, James S. Harrop, Carl Moritz Zipser, Ricardo Rodrigues‐Pinto, James Milligan, Ellen Sarewitz, Armin Curt, Vafa Rahimi‐Movaghar, Bizhan Aarabi, Timothy F. Boerger, Lindsay Tetreault, Robert HC Chen, James D. Guest, Sukhvinder Kalsi‐Ryan, Angus McNair, Mark Kotter, Benjamin M. Davies

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical and Thoracic Myelopathy
Canadian institutionsKrembil FoundationToronto Western HospitalMcMaster UniversityToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersAO FoundationMedical Research CouncilNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsMedicineConstruct validityMyelopathyNeck painContext (archaeology)Physical therapyData extractionSystematic reviewEvidence-based medicineMEDLINEVisual analogue scaleQuality of life (healthcare)Criterion validityContent validityPsychometricsPhysical medicine and rehabilitationAlternative medicinePathologyClinical psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the measurement properties of outcome measures currently used in the assessment of degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) for clinical research. DESIGN: Systematic review DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched through 4 August 2020. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Primary clinical research published in English and whose primary purpose was to evaluate the measurement properties or clinically important differences of instruments used in DCM. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Psychometric properties and clinically important differences were both extracted from each study, assessed for risk of bias and presented in accordance with the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments criteria. RESULTS: Twenty-nine outcome instruments were identified from 52 studies published between 1999 and 2020. They measured neuromuscular function (16 instruments), life impact (five instruments), pain (five instruments) and radiological scoring (five instruments). No instrument had evaluations for all 10 measurement properties and <50% had assessments for all three domains (ie, reliability, validity and responsiveness). There was a paucity of high-quality evidence. Notably, there were no studies that reported on structural validity and no high-quality evidence that discussed content validity. In this context, we identified nine instruments that are interpretable by clinicians: the arm and neck pain scores; the 12-item and 36-item short form health surveys; the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, modified JOA and JOA Cervical Myelopathy Evaluation Questionnaire; the neck disability index; and the visual analogue scale for pain. These include six scores with barriers to application and one score with insufficient criterion and construct validity. CONCLUSIONS: This review aggregates studies evaluating outcome measures used to assess patients with DCM. Overall, there is a need for a set of agreed tools to measure outcomes in DCM. These findings will be used to inform the development of a core measurement set as part of AO Spine RECODE-DCM.

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)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.371
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.676
GPT teacher head0.551
Teacher spread0.124 · 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.

Study designSystematic review
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

Citations37
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicCervical and Thoracic MyelopathyFrench-language works237,207