Final Research Report

View this project's final research report.

Peer-Review Summary

Peer review of PCORI-funded research helps make sure the report presents complete, balanced, and useful information about the research. It also assesses how the project addressed PCORI’s Methodology Standards. During peer review, experts read a draft report of the research and provide comments about the report. These experts may include a scientist focused on the research topic, a specialist in research methods, a patient or caregiver, and a healthcare professional. These reviewers cannot have conflicts of interest with the study.

The peer reviewers point out where the draft report may need revision. For example, they may suggest ways to improve descriptions of the conduct of the study or to clarify the connection between results and conclusions. Sometimes, awardees revise their draft reports twice or more to address all of the reviewers’ comments. 

Peer reviewers commented, and the researchers made changes or provided responses. The comments and responses included the following:

  • Reviewers said the report needed a more consistent structure so that it was clear how the specific methods and results tied to each of the aims. The researchers revised the report to make sure that the descriptions in the methods and results clearly tied to the stated aims.
  • Reviewers asked for more consistent structure in presenting study outcomes, so that readers would be able to discern which analyses demonstrated significant or nonsignificant results. Reviewers also asked that the discussion be revised to also clarify the results in a way that would not overinterpret the significant findings. The researchers revised the methods and results sections to provide more consistent descriptions of the outcome measures and study results. They also  removed any language in the results and discussion that overstated the findings.

Conflict of Interest Disclosures

Project Information

Kristin Archer, PhD
Vanderbilt University Medical Center
$1,867,629
10.25302/04.2020.CER.130601970
Comparative Effectiveness of Postoperative Management for Degenerative Spinal Conditions

Key Dates

December 2013
May 2019
2013
2019

Study Registration Information

Tags

Has Results
Award Type
Health Conditions Health Conditions These are the broad terms we use to categorize our funded research studies; specific diseases or conditions are included within the appropriate larger category. Note: not all of our funded projects focus on a single disease or condition; some touch on multiple diseases or conditions, research methods, or broader health system interventions. Such projects won’t be listed by a primary disease/condition and so won’t appear if you use this filter tool to find them. View Glossary
Populations Populations PCORI is interested in research that seeks to better understand how different clinical and health system options work for different people. These populations are frequently studied in our portfolio or identified as being of interest by our stakeholders. View Glossary
Intervention Strategy Intervention Strategies PCORI funds comparative clinical effectiveness research (CER) studies that compare two or more options or approaches to health care, or that compare different ways of delivering or receiving care. View Glossary
State State The state where the project originates, or where the primary institution or organization is located. View Glossary
Last updated: March 4, 2022