ReviewSchmerz (Berlin, Germany)2026
[Spinal canal stenosis : Widespread disease or just a radiological diagnosis?]
Review in Schmerz (Berlin, Germany), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lumbar spinal canal stenosis primarily affects older individuals over 65 years old and is often associated with typical symptoms, such as spinal claudication. Aside from rare congenital causes, it usually develops secondarily due to age-related changes, such as disc protrusion, facet joint degeneration and ligament hypertrophy. Apart from the typical clinical symptoms, native upright X‑ray images in two planes and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are decisive. Patients without relevant neurological deficits should primarily undergo conservative treatment. In cases of pain that cannot be alleviated by conservative approaches, neurological deficits and ineffective conservative treatment the indications for surgical treatment can be justified. A minimally invasive decompression should be strived for whenever possible. A fusion can become necessary in the presence of a clinically relevant instability, stenosis or malalignment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41543750What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.