LinkedInXFacebook
Subscribe
Orthopedics This Week
  • My Feed
  • |Posts
  • |Events
  • |MSK Innovations
  • |Power Rankings
  • |Masterclasses
  • |Technology Awards
  • Press Releases
  • |Advertising
  • |Job Board
  • Spine
  • ◆Joints
  • ◆Upper Extremities
  • ◆Foot & Ankle
  • ◆Sports Medicine
  • ◆Pain Mgmt
  • ◆Trauma
  • ◆Biologics
  • ◆Technology
  • ◆People
  • ◆Company News
  • ◆Legal & Regulatory
Home/Spine/What’s Hot—and Not—in Spine Research?
Spine

What’s Hot—and Not—in Spine Research?

March 19, 2024 2 min read Premium comments

Advertisement

What’s Hot—and Not—in Spine Research?
Source: Shutterstock
#osteoporosisSecondary#konstantinosmargetis#naturallanguageprocessing#scoliosis#spineprocessing

Researchers from Mount Sinai Health System in New York set out to get an idea of the “hot” and “cold” topics in spine research over time. Their work, “Natural language processing reveals research trends and topics in The Spine Journal over two decades: a topic modeling study,” appears in the March 2024 edition of The Spine Journal.

“The field of spine research is rapidly evolving, with new research topics continually emerging,” co-author Konstantinos Margetis M.D., Ph.D., director of Complex Spine Surgery, Department of Neurosurgery, Mount Sinai Hospital, told OTW.

“Analyzing topics and trends in the literature can provide insights into the shifting research landscape. This study aimed to elucidate prevalent and emerging research topics and trends within The Spine Journal using a natural language processing technique called topic modeling. This is almost impossible to do it manually with conventional methods because it is very time intensive. Therefore, we used natural language processing methodology.”

To review articles from The Spine Journal, the team used BERTopic, a topic modeling technique rooted in natural language processing. The team directed BERTopic to “read” 3,358 documents and vectorize the content into 30 distinct topics.

The most frequently identified topics were:

  • “Outcome Measures,”
  • “Scoliosis,” and
  • “Intradural Lesions.”

Throughout the history of the journal, the three hottest topics were:

  • “Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy,”
  • “Osteoporosis,” and
  • “Opioid Use.”

Conversely, the coldest topics were:

  • “Intradural Lesions,”
  • “Extradural Tumors,” and
  • “Vertebral Augmentation.”

Within the current decade, the hottest topics were:

Advertisement

  • “Screw Biomechanics,”
  • “Paraspinal Muscles,” and
  • “Biologics for Fusion,”

And the cold topics were:

  • “Intraoperative Blood Loss,”
  • “Construct Biomechanics,” and
  • “Material Science.”

Dr. Margetis added: “Rising trends, such as ‘Screw Biomechanics,’ ‘Paraspinal Muscles,’ and ‘Biologics for Fusion,’ denote rising themes of interest in spine research, stimulated by technological progress, novel findings, and evolving healthcare needs.”

“Declining trends, like ‘Intraoperative Blood Loss,’ ‘Construct Biomechanics,’ and ‘Material Science,’ suggest either maturing or underrepresented areas that might require further exploration.”

Looking forward, Dr. Margetis told OTW, “While the theoretical advantages of BERTopic over traditional methods like Latent Dirichlet Allocation are promising, comprehensive validation of these advantages remains challenging.”

“The gold standard for validation would involve human experts manually reviewing and categorizing thousands of abstracts—a task that is not just time-consuming but also practically unfeasible due to the sheer volume and complexity of the data. We acknowledge this as a significant limitation, and while we are confident in the potential of BERTopic based on its foundational methodologies and our observations, we recognize the need for rigorous validation.”

React:

Discussion

14
DS
Dr. Sarah MitchellOrthopedic Surgeon · Mayo Clinic

This is a fascinating development. In my practice we've seen similar outcomes with the revised protocol. The key differentiator seems to be patient selection criteria. Has anyone else noticed the correlation with BMI thresholds?

8
JT
James Thornton, MDSpine Fellow · HSS

Great point. I'd push back slightly on the conclusion, the sample size in the cited study is too small to draw population-level inferences. That said, the directional signal is compelling and worth a larger RCT.

5
RP
R. PatelSports Medicine · Stanford

We implemented a similar approach last year. Early results are promising but we're still gathering 12-month follow-up data. Happy to share our protocol if anyone is interested.

Join the conversation

Orthopedic professionals are discussing this. Sign in and upgrade to read every comment and add your voice.

Subscribe

Get Full Access

Read every OTW article and join member discussions for $24.99/month.

Get Full Access

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Orthopedics This Week

The most trusted source in orthopedic industry news since 2005. Covering spine, joints, trauma, biologics, and the business of orthopedics.

A publication of RRY Publications, LLC

LinkedInXFacebook

Categories

  • Spine
  • Joints
  • Upper Extremities
  • Foot & Ankle
  • Sports Medicine
  • Pain Mgmt
  • Trauma
  • Biologics
  • Technology
  • People
  • Company News
  • Legal & Regulatory

Resources

  • Subscribe
  • Community Posts
  • Job Board
  • Press Release Opportunities
  • Power Rankings
  • About OTW
  • Advertise
  • Contact Us

Get Full Access

Unlimited articles, community posts, and Power Rankings.

Get Full Access

Plans start at $24.99/mo · Annual saves 20%

© 2026 Orthopedics This Week · RRY Publications, LLC

Privacy PolicyTerms of ServiceCookie Policy