MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4409889482 · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-97575-2

Preoperative psychological health impacts pain and disability outcomes following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for cervical radiculopathy

2025· article· en· W4409889482 on OpenAlexaffabout
Erin Cunningham, Erin Bigney, Stephan U Dombrowski, Niels Wedderkopp, Neil Manson, Najmeddan Attabib, Edward Abraham, Chris Small, Eden Richardson, Michael Yang, Eric J. Crawford, Michael H. Weber, Jérôme Paquet, Sean Christie, Raphaële Charest-Morin, Bernard LaRue, Andrew Nataraj, Hamilton Hall, Y. Raja Rampersaud, Charles G. Fisher, Nicolas Dea, Christopher S. Bailey, Jeffrey J. Hébert

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkWestern UniversityUniversity of TorontoUniversité de SherbrookeUniversity of AlbertaVancouver Spine Surgery InstituteSpinal Cord Injury BCUniversité LavalCentre hospitalier de l'Université LavalCentre hospitalier universitaire de QuébecSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of New BrunswickDalhousie UniversityLondon Health Sciences CentreHorizon Health NetworkUniversity of CalgaryMontreal General HospitalCanada East Spine Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnterior cervical discectomy and fusionCervical radiculopathyMedicineSpinal fusionCervical vertebraePhysical therapyCervical spinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aimed to estimate the effects of preoperative psychological health on postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing surgery for cervical spondylotic radiculopathy. This retrospective cohort study included data from patients enrolled in the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network who underwent anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for radiculopathy. Preoperative psychological health was measured with the Patient Health Questionnaire-8 (PHQ-8), and depression and severe psychological symptomology were measured with the Mental Component Score of the Short Form Survey-12 (MCS). Surgical outcomes comprised trajectory subgroups for neck pain and arm pain (numeric rating scales) and disability (neck disability index) measured preoperatively and 3, 12, and 24 months after surgery. For each outcome, patients were dichotomized as following either a poor or a fair-to-excellent trajectory. Average treatment effects were estimated with doubly robust propensity score models using inverse probability of treatment weights accounting for multiple confounders. We included data from 352 patients (43.8% female). Approximately half (52.1%) of patients were identified as depressed based on the PHQ-8, while 61.8% and 33.1% were classified as experiencing depression or severe psychological symptomology, respectively, on the MCS. In fully adjusted models, patients with PHQ-8-measured depression were at increased risk of poor postoperative outcomes for disability (risk ratio[95% CI] = 6.73[1.85 to 24.45]) and neck pain (RR[95% CI] = 1.90[1.09 to 3.32]). Patients with MCS-measured depression were at elevated risk of a poor disability outcome (RR[95% CI] = 2.77[1.30 to 5.90]). Patients reporting severe psychological symptomatology had an increased likelihood of poor disability, neck pain, and arm pain outcomes (RR[95% CI] = 1.82 [1.17 to 2.82] to 2.84[1.58 to 5.09]). These findings highlight the high prevalence of negative psychological features and their impacts on neck surgery outcomes. Future research should prioritize the development and evaluation of preoperative interventions to optimize psychological well-being and improve surgical outcomes in this population.

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)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.345 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicSpine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology→French-language works237,207→