The value of Clinical signs in the diagnosis of Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy - A Systematic review and Meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Delayed diagnosis of degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is likely due to a combination of its subtle symptoms, incomplete neurological assessments by clinicians and a lack of public and professional awareness. Diagnostic criteria for DCM will likely facilitate earlier referral for definitive management. OBJECTIVES: This systematic review aims to determine (i) the diagnostic accuracy of various clinical signs and (ii) the association between clinical signs and disease severity in DCM? METHODS: A search was performed to identify studies on adult patients that evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of a clinical sign used for diagnosing DCM. Studies were also included if they assessed the association between the presence of a clinical sign and disease severity. The QUADAS-2 tool was used to evaluate the risk of bias of individual studies. RESULTS: This review identified eleven studies that used a control group to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of various signs. An additional 61 articles reported on the frequency of clinical signs in a cohort of DCM patients. The most sensitive clinical tests for diagnosing DCM were the Tromner and hyperreflexia, whereas the most specific tests were the Babinski, Tromner, clonus and inverted supinator sign. Five studies evaluated the association between the presence of various clinical signs and disease severity. There was no definite association between Hoffmann sign, Babinski sign or hyperreflexia and disease severity. CONCLUSION: The presence of clinical signs suggesting spinal cord compression should encourage health care professionals to pursue further investigation, such as neuroimaging to either confirm or refute a diagnosis of 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 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 | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.013 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".