Evaluating the utility and quality of large administrative databases in pediatric spinal neurosurgery research

The purpose of this study was to assess the quality of articles utilizing large administrative databases to answer questions related to pediatric spinal neurosurgery by quantifying their adherence to standard reporting guidelines.

A systematic literature search was conducted with search terms including "pediatric" and "neurosurgery," associated neurosurgical diagnoses, and the names of known databases. Study abstracts were reviewed to identify clinical studies involving pediatric populations, spine-related pathology or procedures, and large administrative databases. Included studies were graded using the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) criteria.

A total of 28 papers of the initial 1496 identified met inclusion criteria. These papers involved 10 databases and had a mean study period of 11.46 ± 12.27 years. The subjects of these research papers were undergoing treatment of scoliosis (n = 5), spinal cord injury (n = 5), spinal cord tumors (n = 9), and spine surgery in general (n = 9). The mean STROBE score was 19.41 ± 2.02 (out of 22).

Large administrative databases are commonly used within pediatric spine-related neurosurgical research to cover a broad spectrum of research questions and study topics. The heterogeneity of research to this point encourages the continued use of large databases to better understand treatment and diagnostic trends, perioperative and long-term outcomes, and rare pathologies within pediatric spinal neurosurgery.