↓ Skip to main content

Accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging in detecting lumbo-sacral nerve root compromise: a systematic literature review

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
30 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
93 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging in detecting lumbo-sacral nerve root compromise: a systematic literature review
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12891-016-1236-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nassib Tawa, Anthea Rhoda, Ina Diener

Abstract

MRI is considered to be the diagnostic tool of choice in diagnosing nerve root compromise among patients presenting with clinical suspicion of lumbo-sacral radiculopathy. There exists controversy among researchers and clinicians regarding the diagnostic utility and accuracy of MRI in detecting nerve root compromise and radiculopathy. This review evaluated 4 primary diagnostic accuracy studies that specifically assessed the accuracy of MRI in detecting nerve root compromise, as established in the current literature. Eight electronic data bases were searched for relevant articles from inception until January 2014. All primary diagnostic studies which investigated the accuracy of MRI in diagnosing nerve root compromise among patients with low back and referred leg symptoms were screened for inclusion. Qualifying studies were retrieved and independently assessed for methodological quality using the 'Quality Assessment of Diagnostic tests Accuracy Studies' criteria. Four studies qualified for inclusion in this review. The sensitivity of MRI in detecting lumbar nerve root compromise was very low at 0.25 (95 % CI) while the specificity was relatively high at 0.92 (95 % CI). There is lack of sufficient high quality scientific evidence in support or against the use of MRI in diagnosing nerve root compression and radiculopathy. Therefore, clinicians should always correlate the findings of MRI with the patients' medical history and clinical presentation in clinical decision making.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 30 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 2 2%
South Africa 1 1%
Unknown 90 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 15 16%
Student > Master 13 14%
Student > Bachelor 10 11%
Researcher 5 5%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 4 4%
Other 16 17%
Unknown 30 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 34 37%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 17%
Neuroscience 3 3%
Unspecified 2 2%
Engineering 2 2%
Other 5 5%
Unknown 31 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 January 2023.
All research outputs
#1,843,588
of 25,546,214 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#335
of 4,424 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,965
of 345,309 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#9
of 80 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,546,214 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,424 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 345,309 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 80 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.