271 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17320728)
1. Inter- and intraexaminer reliability in identifying and classifying degenerative marrow (Modic) changes on lumbar spine magnetic resonance scans.
Peterson CK; Gatterman B; Carter JC; Humphreys BK; Weibel A
J Manipulative Physiol Ther; 2007 Feb; 30(2):85-90. PubMed ID: 17320728
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Degenerative marrow (modic) changes on cervical spine magnetic resonance imaging scans: prevalence, inter- and intra-examiner reliability and link to disc herniation.
Mann E; Peterson CK; Hodler J
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2011 Jun; 36(14):1081-5. PubMed ID: 21224758
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Prevalence of modic degenerative marrow changes in the cervical spine.
Peterson CK; Humphreys BK; Pringle TC
J Manipulative Physiol Ther; 2007 Jan; 30(1):5-10. PubMed ID: 17224349
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Interobserver reliability in the interpretation of diagnostic lumbar MRI and nuclear imaging.
Mulconrey DS; Knight RQ; Bramble JD; Paknikar S; Harty PA
Spine J; 2006; 6(2):177-84. PubMed ID: 16517390
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Intra- and interobserver reproducibility of vertebral endplate signal (modic) changes in the lumbar spine: the Nordic Modic Consensus Group classification.
Jensen TS; Sorensen JS; Kjaer P
Acta Radiol; 2007 Sep; 48(7):748-54. PubMed ID: 17729006
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Quantitative measures of modic changes in lumbar spine magnetic resonance imaging: intra- and inter-rater reliability.
Wang Y; Videman T; Niemeläinen R; Battié MC
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2011 Jul; 36(15):1236-43. PubMed ID: 21217445
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Agreement in the interpretation of magnetic resonance images of the lumbar spine.
Kovacs FM; Royuela A; Jensen TS; Estremera A; Amengual G; Muriel A; Galarraga I; Martínez C; Arana E; Sarasíbar H; Salgado RM; Abraira V; López O; Campillo C; del Real MT; Zamora J
Acta Radiol; 2009 Jun; 50(5):497-506. PubMed ID: 19431057
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Modic changes in endplates of lumbar vertebral bodies: prevalence and association with low back and sciatic pain among middle-aged male workers.
Kuisma M; Karppinen J; Niinimäki J; Ojala R; Haapea M; Heliövaara M; Korpelainen R; Taimela S; Natri A; Tervonen O
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2007 May; 32(10):1116-22. PubMed ID: 17471095
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Vertebral artery hypoplasia: prevalence and reliability of identifying and grading its severity on magnetic resonance imaging scans.
Peterson C; Phillips L; Linden A; Hsu W
J Manipulative Physiol Ther; 2010; 33(3):207-11. PubMed ID: 20350674
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Interexaminer reliability of T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging for lumbar bright facet sign.
Longmuir GA; Conley RN
J Manipulative Physiol Ther; 2008 Oct; 31(8):593-601. PubMed ID: 18984242
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [Distribution characteristics of Modic changes of lumbar endplate and its relationship with low back pain].
Han C; Ma X; Ma J; Wang T; Wang P
Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi; 2009 Dec; 23(12):1409-12. PubMed ID: 20073298
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A three-year follow-up of lumbar spine endplate (Modic) changes.
Kuisma M; Karppinen J; Niinimäki J; Kurunlahti M; Haapea M; Vanharanta H; Tervonen O
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2006 Jul; 31(15):1714-8. PubMed ID: 16816768
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Posterior disk displacement: morphologic assessment and measurement reliability--cervical spine.
Cooley JR; Danielson CD; Schultz GD; Hall TA
J Manipulative Physiol Ther; 2001; 24(9):560-8. PubMed ID: 11753329
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Lumbar spine: agreement in the interpretation of 1.5-T MR images by using the Nordic Modic Consensus Group classification form.
Arana E; Royuela A; Kovacs FM; Estremera A; Sarasíbar H; Amengual G; Galarraga I; Martínez C; Muriel A; Abraira V; Gil Del Real MT; Zamora J; Campillo C
Radiology; 2010 Mar; 254(3):809-17. PubMed ID: 20123897
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. A diagnostic classification for lumbar spine registry development.
Glassman SD; Carreon LY; Anderson PA; Resnick DK
Spine J; 2011 Dec; 11(12):1108-16. PubMed ID: 22208855
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Intertester reliability and validity of motion assessments during lumbar spine accessory motion testing.
Landel R; Kulig K; Fredericson M; Li B; Powers CM
Phys Ther; 2008 Jan; 88(1):43-9. PubMed ID: 18029394
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Low-field magnetic resonance imaging of the lumbar spine: reliability of qualitative evaluation of disc and muscle parameters.
Solgaard Sorensen J; Kjaer P; Jensen ST; Andersen P
Acta Radiol; 2006 Nov; 47(9):947-53. PubMed ID: 17077047
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Observer variability based on the strength of MR scanners in the assessment of lumbar degenerative disc disease.
Cihangiroglu M; Yildirim H; Bozgeyik Z; Senol U; Ozdemir H; Topsakal C; Yilmaz S
Eur J Radiol; 2004 Sep; 51(3):202-8. PubMed ID: 15294326
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Interexaminer reliability of eight evaluative dimensions of lumbar segmental abnormality: Part II.
Boline PD; Haas M; Meyer JJ; Kassak K; Nelson C; Keating JC
J Manipulative Physiol Ther; 1993; 16(6):363-74. PubMed ID: 8409784
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Lumbar spine: reliability of MR imaging findings.
Carrino JA; Lurie JD; Tosteson AN; Tosteson TD; Carragee EJ; Kaiser J; Grove MR; Blood E; Pearson LH; Weinstein JN; Herzog R
Radiology; 2009 Jan; 250(1):161-70. PubMed ID: 18955509
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
