MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416665175 · doi:10.3390/jcm14238344

Advancing Precision Medicine in Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy

2025· review· en· W4416665175 on OpenAlexaff
Abdul Al-Shawwa, David W. Cadotte

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical and Thoracic Myelopathy
Canadian institutionsHotchkiss Brain InstituteUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrecision medicineMyelopathyDiffusion MRINatural historyNeuroimagingSpinal cord compressionMEDLINEPresentation (obstetrics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is the leading cause of nontraumatic spinal cord dysfunction and remains clinically heterogeneous in presentation and course. This review synthesizes current evidence on predictors of neurological outcomes across conventional prognostic factors (clinical and macrostructural metrics) and quantitative neuroimaging (microstructural metrics), as well as how machine learning (ML) models integrate these predictors into a precision medicine framework to aid in DCM management. We explore evidence on conventional clinical and radiographic factors. Although several signs and scales are associated with clinical outcomes, cross-study inconsistency and the limits of linear models blunt their standalone utility, underscoring the need for multifactorial modelling. We then assess quantitative MRI biomarkers, including diffusion tensor imaging, magnetization transfer, and myelin water imaging, which index axonal integrity and myelination, thereby enriching risk stratification and prediction. Building on these measurements, we examine ML models combining clinical, imaging, and demographic features to predict postoperative outcomes and, increasingly, the natural history of mild DCM. Finally, current gaps and necessary future directions are outlined, including protocol harmonization, prospective multicentre validation, and clinician-patient education to support equitable uptake. Collectively, this review advances in DCM diagnosis and prognosis, highlighting the role of precision medicine tools for personalized patient care.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.509
Teacher spread0.406 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical MedicineSame topicCervical and Thoracic MyelopathyFrench-language works237,207