These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

155 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37036332)

  • 1. Minimum Clinically Important Difference in Patient-reported Outcome Measures in de novo Degenerative Lumbar Scoliosis: Is it Appropriate to Apply the Values of Adult Spine Deformity?
    Yuan L; Li W; Zeng Y; Chen Z
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2023 Jul; 48(14):1017-1025. PubMed ID: 37036332
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Cultural Variations in the Minimum Clinically Important Difference Thresholds for SRS-22R After Surgery for Adult Spinal Deformity.
    Arima H; Carreon LY; Glassman SD; Yamato Y; Hasegawa T; Togawa D; Kobayashi S; Yoshida G; Yasuda T; Banno T; Oe S; Mihara Y; Ushirozako H; Matsuyama Y
    Spine Deform; 2019 Jul; 7(4):627-632. PubMed ID: 31202381
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Minimum clinically important difference of the health-related quality of life scales in adult spinal deformity calculated by latent class analysis: is it appropriate to use the same values for surgical and nonsurgical patients?
    Yuksel S; Ayhan S; Nabiyev V; Domingo-Sabat M; Vila-Casademunt A; Obeid I; Perez-Grueso FS; Acaroglu E;
    Spine J; 2019 Jan; 19(1):71-78. PubMed ID: 30010046
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Sagittal radiographic parameters demonstrate weak correlations with pretreatment patient-reported health-related quality of life measures in symptomatic de novo degenerative lumbar scoliosis: a European multicenter analysis.
    Faraj SSA; De Kleuver M; Vila-Casademunt A; Holewijn RM; Obeid I; Acaroğlu E; Alanay A; Kleinstück F; Pérez-Grueso FS; Pellisé F
    J Neurosurg Spine; 2018 Jun; 28(6):573-580. PubMed ID: 29570046
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Age variation in the minimum clinically important difference in SRS-22r after surgical treatment for adult spinal deformity - A single institution analysis in Japan.
    Arima H; Carreon LY; Glassman SD; Yamato Y; Hasegawa T; Togawa D; Kobayashi S; Yoshida G; Yasuda T; Banno T; Oe S; Mihara Y; Matsuyama Y
    J Orthop Sci; 2018 Jan; 23(1):20-25. PubMed ID: 28988878
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Preoperative patient-reported outcome score thresholds predict the likelihood of reaching MCID with surgical correction of adult spinal deformity.
    Leyton-Mange A; Truumees E; Bozic KJ; Singh D; Liu TC; Stokes JK; Mahometa MJ; Geck MJ
    Spine Deform; 2021 Jan; 9(1):207-219. PubMed ID: 32779122
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Impact of preoperative depression on 2-year clinical outcomes following adult spinal deformity surgery: the importance of risk stratification based on type of psychological distress.
    Theologis AA; Ailon T; Scheer JK; Smith JS; Shaffrey CI; Bess S; Gupta M; Klineberg EO; Kebaish K; Schwab F; Lafage V; Burton D; Hart R; Ames CP;
    J Neurosurg Spine; 2016 Oct; 25(4):477-485. PubMed ID: 27153146
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. SRS-22R Minimum Clinically Important Difference and Substantial Clinical Benefit After Adult Lumbar Scoliosis Surgery.
    Carreon LY; Kelly MP; Crawford CH; Baldus CR; Glassman SD; Shaffrey CI; Bridwell KH
    Spine Deform; 2018 Jan; 6(1):79-83. PubMed ID: 29287822
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Comprehensive study of back and leg pain improvements after adult spinal deformity surgery: analysis of 421 patients with 2-year follow-up and of the impact of the surgery on treatment satisfaction.
    Scheer JK; Smith JS; Clark AJ; Lafage V; Kim HJ; Rolston JD; Eastlack R; Hart RA; Protopsaltis TS; Kelly MP; Kebaish K; Gupta M; Klineberg E; Hostin R; Shaffrey CI; Schwab F; Ames CP;
    J Neurosurg Spine; 2015 May; 22(5):540-53. PubMed ID: 25700238
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Importance of achieving Scoliosis Research Society-22r minimal clinically important difference for improving patient satisfaction after adult spinal deformity surgery.
    Arima H; Hasegawa T; Yamato Y; Yoshida G; Banno T; Oe S; Mihara Y; Ushirozako H; Yamada T; Watanabe Y; Ide K; Nakai K; Kurosu K; Matsuyama Y
    J Neurosurg Spine; 2021 Oct; 35(4):495-503. PubMed ID: 34298504
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Outcomes of operative treatment for adult spinal deformity: a prospective multicenter assessment with mean 4-year follow-up.
    Elias E; Bess S; Line B; Lafage V; Lafage R; Klineberg E; Kim HJ; Passias PG; Nasser Z; Gum JL; Kebaish K; Eastlack R; Daniels AH; Mundis G; Hostin R; Protopsaltis TS; Soroceanu A; Hamilton DK; Kelly MP; Gupta M; Hart R; Schwab FJ; Burton D; Ames CP; Shaffrey CI; Smith JS;
    J Neurosurg Spine; 2022 Oct; 37(4):607-616. PubMed ID: 35535835
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The minimum detectable measurement difference for the Scoliosis Research Society-22r in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a comparison with the minimum clinically important difference.
    Kelly MP; Lenke LG; Sponseller PD; Pahys JM; Bastrom TP; Lonner BS; Abel MF
    Spine J; 2019 Aug; 19(8):1319-1323. PubMed ID: 30986576
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Would you do it again? Discrepancies between patient and surgeon perceptions following adult spine deformity surgery.
    Bess S; Line B; Ames C; Burton D; Mundis G; Eastlack R; Hart R; Gupta M; Klineberg E; Kim HJ; Hostin R; Kebaish K; Lafage V; Lafage R; Schwab F; Shaffrey C; Smith JS;
    Spine J; 2023 Aug; 23(8):1115-1126. PubMed ID: 37149153
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Patient profiling can identify patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD) at risk for conversion from nonoperative to surgical treatment: initial steps to reduce ineffective ASD management.
    Passias PG; Jalai CM; Line BG; Poorman GW; Scheer JK; Smith JS; Shaffrey CI; Burton DC; Fu KG; Klineberg EO; Hart RA; Schwab F; Lafage V; Bess S;
    Spine J; 2018 Feb; 18(2):234-244. PubMed ID: 28688984
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Correlation of 2-year SRS-22r and ODI patient-reported outcomes with 5-year patient-reported outcomes after complex spinal fusion: a 5-year single-institution study of 118 patients.
    Adogwa O; Karikari IO; Elsamadicy AA; Sergesketter AR; Galan D; Bridwell KH
    J Neurosurg Spine; 2018 Oct; 29(4):422-428. PubMed ID: 29979138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Factors Associated with Improved Quality of Life Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Surgery for Adult Spinal Deformity.
    Arima H; Hasegawa T; Yamato Y; Togawa D; Yoshida G; Yasuda T; Banno T; Oe S; Mihara Y; Ushirozako H; Yamada T; Watanabe Y; Ide K; Nakai K; Matsuyama Y
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2021 Mar; 46(6):E384-E391. PubMed ID: 33394978
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The likelihood of reaching minimum clinically important difference and substantial clinical benefit at 2 years following a 3-column osteotomy: analysis of 140 patients.
    Fakurnejad S; Scheer JK; Lafage V; Smith JS; Deviren V; Hostin R; Mundis GM; Burton DC; Klineberg E; Gupta M; Kebaish K; Shaffrey CI; Bess S; Schwab F; Ames CP;
    J Neurosurg Spine; 2015 Sep; 23(3):340-8. PubMed ID: 26091440
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Association Between Radiographic Spinopelvic Parameters and Health-related Quality of Life in De Novo Degenerative Lumbar Scoliosis and Concomitant Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.
    Gao A; Wang Y; Yu M; Wei F; Jiang L; Liu Z; Liu X
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2020 Aug; 45(16):E1013-E1019. PubMed ID: 32118697
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Validity and responsiveness of PROMIS in adult spinal deformity: The need for a self-image domain.
    Raad M; Jain A; Huang M; Skolasky RL; Sciubba DM; Kebaish KM; Neuman BJ
    Spine J; 2019 Jan; 19(1):50-55. PubMed ID: 30053523
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.