1037 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23158968)
1. Determination of minimum clinically important difference (MCID) in pain, disability, and quality of life after revision fusion for symptomatic pseudoarthrosis.
Parker SL; Adogwa O; Mendenhall SK; Shau DN; Anderson WN; Cheng JS; Devin CJ; McGirt MJ
Spine J; 2012 Dec; 12(12):1122-8. PubMed ID: 23158968
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Determination of minimum clinically important difference in pain, disability, and quality of life after extension of fusion for adjacent-segment disease.
Parker SL; Mendenhall SK; Shau D; Adogwa O; Cheng JS; Anderson WN; Devin CJ; McGirt MJ
J Neurosurg Spine; 2012 Jan; 16(1):61-7. PubMed ID: 21962034
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Minimum clinically important difference in pain, disability, and quality of life after neural decompression and fusion for same-level recurrent lumbar stenosis: understanding clinical versus statistical significance.
Parker SL; Mendenhall SK; Shau DN; Adogwa O; Anderson WN; Devin CJ; McGirt MJ
J Neurosurg Spine; 2012 May; 16(5):471-8. PubMed ID: 22324801
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Utility of minimum clinically important difference in assessing pain, disability, and health state after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis.
Parker SL; Adogwa O; Paul AR; Anderson WN; Aaronson O; Cheng JS; McGirt MJ
J Neurosurg Spine; 2011 May; 14(5):598-604. PubMed ID: 21332281
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Assessment of the minimum clinically important difference in pain, disability, and quality of life after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: clinical article.
Parker SL; Godil SS; Shau DN; Mendenhall SK; McGirt MJ
J Neurosurg Spine; 2013 Feb; 18(2):154-60. PubMed ID: 23176164
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Minimum clinically important difference in lumbar spine surgery patients: a choice of methods using the Oswestry Disability Index, Medical Outcomes Study questionnaire Short Form 36, and pain scales.
Copay AG; Glassman SD; Subach BR; Berven S; Schuler TC; Carreon LY
Spine J; 2008; 8(6):968-74. PubMed ID: 18201937
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Defining the minimum clinically important difference for grade I degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: insights from the Quality Outcomes Database.
Asher AL; Kerezoudis P; Mummaneni PV; Bisson EF; Glassman SD; Foley KT; Slotkin JR; Potts EA; Shaffrey ME; Shaffrey CI; Coric D; Knightly JJ; Park P; Fu KM; Devin CJ; Archer KR; Chotai S; Chan AK; Virk MS; Bydon M
Neurosurg Focus; 2018 Jan; 44(1):E2. PubMed ID: 29290132
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Determination of the minimum improvement in pain, disability, and health state associated with cost-effectiveness: introduction of the concept of minimum cost-effective difference.
Parker SL; McGirt MJ
Neurosurgery; 2012 Dec; 71(6):1149-55. PubMed ID: 22986596
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Preoperative Zung depression scale predicts patient satisfaction independent of the extent of improvement after revision lumbar surgery.
Adogwa O; Parker SL; Shau DN; Mendenhall SK; Bydon A; Cheng JS; Asher AL; McGirt MJ
Spine J; 2013 May; 13(5):501-6. PubMed ID: 23422730
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Preoperative Zung Depression Scale predicts outcome after revision lumbar surgery for adjacent segment disease, recurrent stenosis, and pseudarthrosis.
Adogwa O; Parker SL; Shau DN; Mendenhall SK; Aaronson OS; Cheng JS; Devin CJ; McGirt MJ
Spine J; 2012 Mar; 12(3):179-85. PubMed ID: 21937282
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Neck Disability Index, short form-36 physical component summary, and pain scales for neck and arm pain: the minimum clinically important difference and substantial clinical benefit after cervical spine fusion.
Carreon LY; Glassman SD; Campbell MJ; Anderson PA
Spine J; 2010 Jun; 10(6):469-74. PubMed ID: 20359958
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Assessment of spine surgery outcomes: inconsistency of change amongst outcome measurements.
Copay AG; Martin MM; Subach BR; Carreon LY; Glassman SD; Schuler TC; Berven S
Spine J; 2010 Apr; 10(4):291-6. PubMed ID: 20171937
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Prospective analysis of clinical evaluation and self-assessment by patients after decompression surgery for degenerative lumbar canal stenosis.
Haro H; Maekawa S; Hamada Y
Spine J; 2008; 8(2):380-4. PubMed ID: 17433781
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Differentiating minimum clinically important difference for primary and revision lumbar fusion surgeries.
Carreon LY; Bratcher KR; Canan CE; Burke LO; Djurasovic M; Glassman SD
J Neurosurg Spine; 2013 Jan; 18(1):102-6. PubMed ID: 23157276
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Long-term outcomes of revision fusion for lumbar pseudarthrosis: clinical article.
Adogwa O; Parker SL; Shau D; Mendelhall SK; Cheng J; Aaronson O; Devin CJ; McGirt MJ
J Neurosurg Spine; 2011 Oct; 15(4):393-8. PubMed ID: 21699473
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Usefulness of minimum clinically important difference for assessing patients with subaxial degenerative cervical spine disease: statistical versus substantial clinical benefit.
Auffinger B; Lam S; Shen J; Thaci B; Roitberg BZ
Acta Neurochir (Wien); 2013 Dec; 155(12):2345-54; discussion 2355. PubMed ID: 24136679
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Is the Oswestry Disability Index a valid measure of response to sacroiliac joint treatment?
Copay AG; Cher DJ
Qual Life Res; 2016 Feb; 25(2):283-292. PubMed ID: 26245709
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Do measures of surgical effectiveness at 1 year after lumbar spine surgery accurately predict 2-year outcomes?
Adogwa O; Elsamadicy AA; Han JL; Cheng J; Karikari I; Bagley CA
J Neurosurg Spine; 2016 Dec; 25(6):689-696. PubMed ID: 26722957
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Effect of complications within 90 days on patient-reported outcomes 3 months and 12 months following elective surgery for lumbar degenerative disease.
Chotai S; Parker SL; Sivaganesan A; Sielatycki JA; Asher AL; McGirt MJ; Devin CJ
Neurosurg Focus; 2015 Dec; 39(6):E8. PubMed ID: 26621422
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Testing minimal clinically important difference: consensus or conundrum?
Gatchel RJ; Mayer TG
Spine J; 2010 Apr; 10(4):321-7. PubMed ID: 20362248
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
