Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 30

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Fragility Analysis of Statistically Significant Outcomes of Randomized Control Trials in Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review

Muthu, Sathish, Ramakrishnan, Eswar·2021·Spine
DOI 10.1097/brs.0000000000003645
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Study Design.: Systematic review. Objectives.: The aim of this study was to assess the robustness of statistically significant outcomes from randomized control trials (RCTs) in spine surgery using Fragility Index (FI) which is a novel metric measuring the number of events upon which statistical significance of the outcome depends. Summary of Background Data.: Many trials in Spine surgery were characterized by fewer outcome events along with small sample size. FI helps us identify the robustness of the results from such studies with statistically significant dichotomous outcomes. Methods.: We conducted independent and in duplicate, a systematic review of published RCTs in spine surgery from PubMed Central, Embase, and Cochrane Database. RCTs with 1:1 prospective study design and reporting statistically significant dichotomous primary or secondary outcomes were included. FI was calculated for each RCT and its correlation with various factors was analyzed. Results.: Seventy trials met inclusion criteria with a median sample size of 133 (interquartile range [IQR]: 80–218) and median reported events per trial was 38 (IQR: 13–94). The median FI score was 2 (IQR: 0–5), which means if we switch two patients from nonevent to event, the statistical significance of the outcome is lost. The FI score was less than the number of patients lost to follow-up in 28 of 70 trials. The FI score was found to positively correlated with sample size ( r = 0.431, P = 0.001), total number of outcome events ( r = 0.305, P = 0.01) while negatively correlated with P value ( r = −0.392, P = 0.001). Funding, journal impact-factor, risk of bias domains, and year of publication did not have a significant correlation. Conclusion.: Statistically significant dichotomous outcomes reported in spine surgery RCTs are more often fragile and outcomes of the patients lost to follow-up could have changed the significance of results and hence it needs caution before transcending their results into clinical application. The addition of FI in routine reporting of RCTs would guide readers on the robustness of the statistical significance of outcomes. RCTs with FI ≥5 without any patient lost to follow-up can be considered to have clinically robust results. Level of Evidence: 1

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/brs.0000000000003645

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Research works printed but not linked: 95

  1. Bhandari, 2001, User's guide to the orthopaedic literature: how to use an article about a surgical therapy, J Bone Joint Surg Am, 83-A, 916, 10.2106/00004623-200106000-00015 · DOI
  2. Bhandari, 2005, The undue influence of significant p-values on the perceived importance of study results, Acta Orthop, 76, 291, 10.1080/00016470510030724 · DOI
  3. van Oldenrijk, 2013, Do authors report surgical expertise in open spine surgery related randomized controlled trials? A systematic review on quality of reporting, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 38, 857, 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31827ecb1c · DOI
  4. Bailey, 2004, Type II error in the spine surgical literature, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 29, 1146, 10.1097/00007632-200405150-00018 · DOI
  5. Sathish, 2020, Systematic reviews and meta-analysis in spine surgery—how good are they in methodological quality? A systematic review, Global Spine J, 2192568220906810
  6. Bassler, 2010, Stopping randomized trials early for benefit and estimation of treatment effects: systematic review and meta-regression analysis, JAMA, 303, 1180, 10.1001/jama.2010.310 · DOI
  7. Montori, 2005, Randomized trials stopped early for benefit: a systematic review, JAMA, 294, 2203, 10.1001/jama.294.17.2203 · DOI · Paper page
  8. Walsh, 2014, The statistical significance of randomized controlled trial results is frequently fragile: a case for a fragility index, J Clin Epidemiol, 67, 622, 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.10.019 · DOI
  9. Glassman, 2008, RhBMP-2 versus iliac crest bone graft for lumbar spine fusion: a randomized, controlled trial in patients over sixty years of age, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 33, 2843, 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318190705d · DOI
  10. Bederman, 2012, Randomized trials in surgery: how far have we come?, J Bone Joint Surg Am, 94, 2, 10.2106/JBJS.K.01627 · DOI
  11. Moher, 2009, Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement, Ann Intern Med, 151, 264, 10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135 · DOI · Paper page
  12. Shea, 2017, AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both, BMJ, 358, j4008, 10.1136/bmj.j4008 · DOI · Paper page
  13. Viera, 2005, Understanding interobserver agreement: the kappa statistic, Fam Med, 37, 360
  14. Hiller, 2012, Acetaminophen improves analgesia but does not reduce opioid requirement after major spine surgery in children and adolescents, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 37, E1225, 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318263165c · DOI
  15. Arnold, 2016, Efficacy of i-factor bone graft versus autograft in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: results of the prospective, randomized, single-blinded food and drug administration investigational device exemption study, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 41, 1075, 10.1097/BRS.0000000000001466 · DOI
  16. Peters, 2015, Antifibrinolytics reduce blood loss in adult spinal deformity surgery: a prospective, randomized controlled trial, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 40, E443, 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000799 · DOI
  17. He, 2014, The difference in superior adjacent segment pathology after lumbar posterolateral fusion by using 2 different pedicle screw insertion techniques in 9-year minimum follow-up, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 39, 1093, 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000353 · DOI
  18. Bai, 2013, Comparison of the pedicle screws placement between electronic conductivity device and normal pedicle finder in posterior surgery of scoliosis, J Spinal Disord Tech, 26, 316, 10.1097/BSD.0b013e318247f21d · DOI
  19. Barth, 2018, Endplate changes after lumbar discectomy with and without implantation of an annular closure device, Acta Neurochir (Wien), 160, 855, 10.1007/s00701-017-3463-y · DOI
  20. Stromqvist, 2013, X-stop versus decompressive surgery for lumbar neurogenic intermittent claudication: randomized controlled trial with 2-year follow-up, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 38, 1436, 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31828ba413 · DOI
  21. Bonfill, 2017, Efficacy and safety of urinary catheters with silver alloy coating in patients with spinal cord injury: a multicentric pragmatic randomized controlled trial. The ESCALE trial, Spine J, 17, 1650, 10.1016/j.spinee.2017.05.025 · DOI
  22. Klazen, 2010, Percutaneous vertebroplasty is not a risk factor for new osteoporotic compression fractures: results from VERTOS II, AJNR Am J Neuroradiol, 31, 1447, 10.3174/ajnr.A2148 · DOI
  23. Sköld, 2013, Five-year follow-up of total disc replacement compared to fusion: a randomized controlled trial, Eur Spine J, 22, 2288, 10.1007/s00586-013-2926-y · DOI
  24. Coric, 2011, Prospective, randomized, multicenter study of cervical arthroplasty: 269 patients from the KineflexjC artificial disc investigational device exemption study with a minimum 2-year follow-up: clinical article, J Neurosurg Spine, 15, 348, 10.3171/2011.5.SPINE10769 · DOI
  25. Murrey, 2009, Results of the prospective, randomized, controlled multicenter food and drug administration investigational device exemption study of the ProDisc-C total disc replacement versus anterior discectomy and fusion for the treatment of 1-level symptomatic cervical disc disease, Spine J, 9, 275, 10.1016/j.spinee.2008.05.006 · DOI
  26. Baskin, 2003, A prospective, randomized, controlled cervical fusion study using recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 with the CORNERSTONE-SR allograft ring and the ATLANTIS anterior cervical plate, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 28, 1219, 10.1097/01.BRS.0000065486.22141.CA · DOI
  27. Dawson, 2009, Recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 on an absorbable collagen sponge with an osteoconductive bulking agent in posterolateral arthrodesis with instrumentation. A prospective randomized trial, J Bone Joint Surg Am, 91, 1604, 10.2106/JBJS.G.01157 · DOI
  28. Delawi, 2016, OP-1 compared with iliac crest autograft in instrumented posterolateral fusion: a randomized, multicenter non-inferiority trial, J Bone Joint Surg Am, 98, 441, 10.2106/JBJS.O.00209 · DOI
  29. Xu, 2017, A randomized controlled trial on the effects of collagen sponge and topical tranexamic acid in posterior spinal fusion surgeries, J Orthop Surg Res, 12, 166, 10.1186/s13018-017-0672-2 · DOI
  30. Kallmes, 2009, A randomized trial of vertebroplasty for osteoporotic spinal fractures, N Engl J Med, 361, 569, 10.1056/NEJMoa0900563 · DOI
  31. Ringel, 2012, Accuracy of robot-assisted placement of lumbar and sacral pedicle screws: a prospective randomized comparison to conventional freehand screw implantation, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 37, E496, 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31824b7767 · DOI
  32. Phillips, 2013, A prospective, randomized, controlled clinical investigation comparing PCM cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. 2-year results from the US FDA IDE clinical trial, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 38, E907, 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318296232f · DOI
  33. Garcia, 2015, Lumbar total disc replacement for discogenic low back pain: two-year outcomes of the activl multicenter randomized controlled IDE clinical trial, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 40, 1873, 10.1097/BRS.0000000000001245 · DOI
  34. Roh, 2014, Efficacy of palonosetron versus ramosetron on preventing opioid-based analgesia-related nausea and vomiting after lumbar spinal surgery: a prospective, randomized, and double-blind trial, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 39, E543, 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000236 · DOI
  35. Lofgren, 2010, Clinical and radiological evaluation of trabecular metal and the Smith-Robinson technique in anterior cervical fusion for degenerative disease: a prospective, randomized, controlled study with 2-year follow-up, Eur Spine J, 19, 464, 10.1007/s00586-009-1161-z · DOI
  36. Han, 2015, Necessity of intraoperative three-dimensional navigation for low lumbar spine: a randomized controlled study, Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi, 95, 1796
  37. Hurlbert, 2013, rhBMP-2 for posterolateral instrumented lumbar fusion: a multicenter prospective randomized controlled trial, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 38, 2139, 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000007 · DOI
  38. Zigler, 2013, ProDisc-C and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion as surgical treatment for single-level cervical symptomatic degenerative disc disease: five-year results of a Food and Drug Administration study, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 38, 203, 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318278eb38 · DOI
  39. Bible, 2013, Implant contamination during spine surgery, Spine J, 13, 637, 10.1016/j.spinee.2012.11.053 · DOI
  40. Wu, 2014, Hemostatic techniques following multilevel posterior lumbar spine surgery: a randomized control trial, J Spinal Disord Tech, 27, 442, 10.1097/BSD.0000000000000063 · DOI
  41. Burkus, 2010, Long-term clinical and radiographic outcomes of cervical disc replacement with the prestige disc: results from a prospective randomized controlled clinical trial, J Neurosurg Spine, 13, 308, 10.3171/2010.3.SPINE09513 · DOI
  42. Thalgott, 2009, A prospective, randomized, blinded, single-site study to evaluate the clinical and radiographic differences between frozen and freeze-dried allograft when used as part of a circumferential anterior lumbar interbody fusion procedure, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 34, 1251, 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181a005d7 · DOI
  43. Blasco, 2012, Effect of vertebroplasty on pain relief, quality of life, and the incidence of new vertebral fractures: a 12-month randomized follow-up, controlled trial, J Bone Miner Res, 27, 1159, 10.1002/jbmr.1564 · DOI
  44. Dimar, 2009, Clinical and radiographic analysis of an optimized rhBMP-2 formulation as an autograft replacement in posterolateral lumbar spine arthrodesis, J Bone Joint Surg Am, 91, 1377, 10.2106/JBJS.H.00200 · DOI
  45. Nagahama, 2011, Does alendronate disturb the healing process of posterior lumbar interbody fusion? A prospective randomized trial, J Neurosurg Spine, 14, 500, 10.3171/2010.11.SPINE10245 · DOI
  46. O’Neill, 2014, Bupivacaine for pain reduction after iliac crest bone graft harvest, Orthopedics, 37, e428, 10.3928/01477447-20140430-52 · DOI
  47. Kim, 2017, A prospective, randomized, controlled trial of robot-assisted vs freehand pedicle screw fixation in spine surgery, Int J Med Robot, 13, 10.1002/rcs.1779 · DOI
  48. Korovessis, 2013, Balloon kyphoplasty versus KIVA vertebral augmentation—comparison of 2 techniques for osteoporotic vertebral body fractures: a prospective randomized study, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 38, 292, 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31826b3aef · DOI
  49. Kubota, 2019, Platelet-rich plasma enhances bone union in posterolateral lumbar fusion: a prospective randomized controlled trial, Spine J, 19, e34, 10.1016/j.spinee.2017.07.167 · DOI
  50. Cheng, 2009, Posterior lumbar interbody fusion versus posterolateral fusion in spondylolisthesis: a prospective controlled study in the Han nationality, Int Orthop, 33, 1043, 10.1007/s00264-008-0588-x · DOI
  51. Cheng, 2011, Superiority of the bryan disc prosthesis for cervical myelopathy: a randomized study with 3- year follow up, Clin Orthop Relat Res, 469, 3408, 10.1007/s11999-011-2039-z · DOI
  52. Lavelle, 2019, Ten-year outcomes of cervical disc replacement with the BRYAN cervical disc: results from a prospective, randomized, controlled clinical trial, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 44, 601, 10.1097/BRS.0000000000002907 · DOI
  53. Aglio, 2018, Preemptive analgesia for postoperative pain relief in thoracolumbosacral spine operations: a double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial, J Neurosurg Spine, 29, 647, 10.3171/2018.5.SPINE171380 · DOI
  54. Linovitz, 2002, Combined magnetic fields accelerate and increase spine fusion: a double-blind, randomized, placebo controlled study, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 27, 1383, 10.1097/00007632-200207010-00002 · DOI
  55. Engquist, 2013, Surgery versus nonsurgical treatment of cervical radiculopathy: a prospective, randomized study comparing surgery plus physiotherapy with physiotherapy alone with a 2-year followup, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 38, 1715, 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31829ff095 · DOI
  56. Coughlan, 2018, A prospective, randomized, multicenter study comparing silicated calcium phosphate versus BMP-2 synthetic bone graft in posterolateral instrumented lumbar fusion for degenerative spinal disorders, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 43, E860, 10.1097/BRS.0000000000002678 · DOI
  57. Kanayama, 2006, A prospective randomized study of posterolateral lumbar fusion using osteogenic protein-1 (OP-1) versus local autograft with ceramic bone substitute: emphasis of surgical exploration and histologic assessment, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 31, 1067, 10.1097/01.brs.0000216444.01888.21 · DOI
  58. Merc, 2013, A multi-level rapid prototyping drill guide template reduces the perforation risk of pedicle screw placement in the lumbar and sacral spine, Arch Orthop Trauma Surg, 133, 893, 10.1007/s00402-013-1755-0 · DOI
  59. Putzier, 2009, Allogeneic versus autologous cancellous bone in lumbar segmental spondylodesis: a randomized prospective study, Eur Spine J, 18, 687, 10.1007/s00586-008-0875-7 · DOI
  60. Farrokhi, 2011, Randomized controlled trial of percutaneous vertebroplasty versus optimal medical management for the relief of pain and disability in acute osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures, J Neurosurg Spine, 14, 561, 10.3171/2010.12.SPINE10286 · DOI
  61. Nandyala, 2014, Prospective, randomized, controlled trial of silicate-substituted calcium phosphate versus rhBMP-2 in a minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 39, 185, 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000106 · DOI
  62. Ovadia, 2019, Closed wound subfascial suction drainage in posterior fusion surgery for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a prospective randomized control study, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 44, 377, 10.1097/BRS.0000000000002892 · DOI
  63. Phillips, 2015, Long-term outcomes of the US FDA IDE prospective, randomized controlled clinical trial comparing PCM cervical disc arthroplasty with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 40, 674, 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000869 · DOI
  64. Hart, 2014, Allograft alone versus allograft with bone marrow concentrate for the healing of the instrumented posterolateral lumbar fusion, Spine J, 14, 1318, 10.1016/j.spinee.2013.12.014 · DOI
  65. Rajasekaran, 2007, Randomized clinical study to compare the accuracy of navigated and non-navigated thoracic pedicle screws in deformity correction surgeries, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 32, E56, 10.1097/01.brs.0000252094.64857.ab · DOI
  66. Rasmussen, 2008, Epidural steroid following discectomy for herniated lumbar disc reduces neurological impairment and enhances recovery: a randomized study with two-year follow-up, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 33, 2028, 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181833903 · DOI
  67. Sasso, 2004, A prospective, randomized controlled clinical trial of anterior lumbar interbody fusion using a titanium cylindrical threaded fusion device, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 29, 113, 10.1097/01.BRS.0000107007.31714.77 · DOI
  68. Sasso, 2017, Long-term clinical outcomes of cervical disc arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized, controlled trial, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 42, 209, 10.1097/BRS.0000000000001746 · DOI
  69. Ruetten, 2009, Surgical treatment for lumbar lateral recess stenosis with the full-endoscopic interlaminar approach versus conventional microsurgical technique: a prospective, randomized, controlled study, J Neurosurg Spine, 10, 476, 10.3171/2008.7.17634 · DOI
  70. Ohtori, 2011, Single-level instrumented posterolateral fusion of the lumbar spine with a local bone graft versus an iliac crest bone graft: a prospective, randomized study with a 2-year follow-up, Eur Spine J, 20, 635, 10.1007/s00586-010-1656-7 · DOI
  71. Glassman, 2007, The efficacy of rhBMP-2 for posterolateral lumbar fusion in smokers, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 32, 1693, 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318074c366 · DOI
  72. Berg, 2009, Total disc replacement compared to lumbar fusion: a randomised controlled trial with 2-year follow-up, Eur Spine J, 18, 1512, 10.1007/s00586-009-1047-0 · DOI
  73. Thomé, 2018, Annular closure in lumbar microdiscectomy for prevention of reherniation: a randomized clinical trial, Spine J, 18, 2278, 10.1016/j.spinee.2018.05.003 · DOI
  74. Jiya, 2011, Posterior lumbar interbody fusion using non resorbable poly-ether-ether-ketone versus resorbable poly-L-lactide-co-D,L-lactide fusion devices. Clinical outcome at a minimum of 2-year follow-up, Eur Spine J, 20, 618, 10.1007/s00586-010-1568-6 · DOI
  75. Pitzen, 2009, Implant complications, fusion, loss of lordosis, and outcome after anterior cervical plating with dynamic or rigid plates: two-year results of a multi-centric, randomized, controlled study, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 34, 641, 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318198ce10 · DOI
  76. Jenkins, 2018, The effect of local versus intravenous corticosteroids on the likelihood of dysphagia and dysphonia following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a single-blinded, prospective, randomized controlled trial, J Bone Joint Surg Am, 100, 1461, 10.2106/JBJS.17.01540 · DOI
  77. Vogl, 2013, Cement directed kyphoplasty reduces cement leakage as compared with vertebroplasty: results of a controlled, randomized trial, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 38, 1730, 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182a14d15 · DOI
  78. Gauger, 2009, Epidural analgesia compared with intravenous analgesia after pediatric posterior spinal fusion, J Pediatr Orthop, 29, 588, 10.1097/BPO.0b013e3181b2ba08 · DOI
  79. Wu, 2010, Pedicle screw placement in the thoracic spine: a randomized comparison study of computer-assisted navigation and conventional techniques, Chin J Traumatol, 13, 201
  80. Chen, 2013, Comparison of titanium and polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages in the surgical treatment of multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a prospective, randomized, control study with over 7-year follow-up, Eur Spine J, 22, 1539, 10.1007/s00586-013-2772-y · DOI
  81. Wu, 2011, Accuracy and safety assessment of pedicle screw placement using the rapid prototyping technique in severe congenital scoliosis, J Spinal Disord Tech, 24, 444, 10.1097/BSD.0b013e318201be2a · DOI
  82. Yang, 2012, Treatment of MM-associated spinal fracture with percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) and chemotherapy, Eur Spine J, 21, 912, 10.1007/s00586-011-2105-y · DOI
  83. Devereaux, 2005, Need for expertise based randomised controlled trials, BMJ, 330, 88, 10.1136/bmj.330.7482.88 · DOI · Paper page
  84. Goodman, 1999, Toward evidence-based medical statistics. 1: The P value fallacy, Ann Intern Med, 130, 995e1004
  85. Feinstein, 1990, The unit fragility index: an additional appraisal of “statistical significance” for a contrast of two proportions, J Clin Epidemiol, 43, 201e209, 10.1016/0895-4356(90)90186-S · DOI
  86. Walter, 1991, Statistical significance and fragility criteria for assessing a difference of two proportions, J Clin Epidemiol, 44, 1373e1378, 10.1016/0895-4356(91)90098-T · DOI
  87. Shen, 2018, Fragility of results in ophthalmology randomized controlled trials: a systematic review, Ophthalmology, 125, 642, 10.1016/j.ophtha.2017.11.015 · DOI
  88. Mazzinari, 2018, The fragility of statistically significant findings in randomised controlled anaesthesiology trials: systematic review of the medical literature, Br J Anaesth, 120, 935, 10.1016/j.bja.2018.01.012 · DOI
  89. Noel, 2018, The fragility of statistically significant findings from randomized trials in head and neck surgery, Laryngoscope, 128, 2094, 10.1002/lary.27183 · DOI
  90. Ridgeon, 2016, The Fragility Index in multicenter randomized controlled critical care trials, Crit Care Med, 44, 1278e1284, 10.1097/CCM.0000000000001670 · DOI
  91. Khan, 2017, The fragility of statistically significant findings from randomized trials in sports surgery, Am J Sports Med, 45, 2164e2170, 10.1177/0363546516674469 · DOI
  92. Tignanelli, 2019, The Fragility Index in randomized clinical trials as a means of optimizing patient care, JAMA Surg, 154, 74, 10.1001/jamasurg.2018.4318 · DOI
  93. Evaniew, 2015, The fragility of statistically significant findings from randomized trials in spine surgery: a systematic survey, Spine J, 15, 2188e2197, 10.1016/j.spinee.2015.06.004 · DOI
  94. Chung, 2017, Minimum clinically important difference: current trends in the spine literature, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 42, 1096, 10.1097/BRS.0000000000001990 · DOI
  95. Ahmed, 2016, Does sample size matter when interpreting the fragility index?, Crit Care Med, 44, e1142, 10.1097/CCM.0000000000001976 · DOI

Cited by

See all 30

Metadata

Authors
Muthu, S., & Ramakrishnan, E.
Venue
Spine
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
2020-07-31
Volume
46
Issue
3
Pages
198-208
ISSN
  • 0362-2436
  • 1528-1159
DOI
10.1097/brs.0000000000003645
Cited by
30
References
1
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Fragility Analysis of Statistically Significant Outcomes of Randomized Control Trials in Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/brs.0000000000003645
The paper
Muthu, S., & Ramakrishnan, E. (2021). Fragility Analysis of Statistically Significant Outcomes of Randomized Control Trials in Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review. Spine. https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0000000000003645

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.