Evidence Hub

The mechanical properties of the spinal cord: a protocol for a systematic review of previous testing procedures and results

Megan Stanners, Marguerite O’Riordan, Laura Hartley, E. Theodosiou, Jean-Baptiste R. G. Souppez, A. Gardner

Systematic Reviews, 2024

1 citation

Abstract

Background Spinal cord compression is a pathology seen in routine clinical practice. However, there remain a number of unanswered questions around both the understanding of the pathogenesis and the best method of treatment of the condition. This is partly due to the issues of the real-life testing of the physical properties of the spinal cord, either through the use of cadaveric human specimens or through animal testing, both of which have methodological, as well as ethical, issues. Design and methods This paper details a protocol for a systematic review of the literature on the mechanical properties of the spinal cord. We will conduct a literature search of a number of electronic databases, along with the grey literature, as a single-stage search. All literature will be screened for appropriate studies which will then be reviewed fully to extract relevant information on the methodology and mechanics of the reported testing along with the results. Two reviewers will separately screen and extract the data, with a comparison of results to ensure concordance. Conflicts will be resolved through discussion and independent arbitration as required. The methodological quality of the studies will be assessed within the ARRIVE guidelines using the CAMARADES framework and SYRCLE risk of bias tool. A narrative synthesis will be created with the appropriate tables to describe the demographics and findings of the included studies. Discussion The systematic review described here will form…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free