1. Epstein JA. The surgical management of cervical spinal stenosis, spondylosis, and myeloradiculopathy by means of the posterior approach. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1988 13:864-9.
2. Nouri A, Martin AR, Nater A, et al. Influence of magnetic resonance imaging features on surgical decision-making in degenerative cervical myelopathy: results from a global survey of AOSpine International Members. World Neurosurg 2017 105:864-74.
3. Irwin ZN, Hilibrand A, Gustavel M, et al. Variation in surgical decision making for degenerative spinal disorders. Part II: cervical spine. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2005 30:2214-9.
4. Lawrence BD, Jacobs WB, Norvell DC, et al. Anterior versus posterior approach for treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a systematic review. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2013 38(22 Suppl 1):S173-82.
5. Fehlings MG, Barry S, Kopjar B, et al. Anterior versus posterior surgical approaches to treat cervical spondylotic myelopathy: outcomes of the prospective multicenter AOSpine North America CSM study in 264 patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2013 38:2247-52.
6. Fehlings MG, Jha NK, Hewson SM, et al. Is surgery for cervical spondylotic myelopathy cost-effective? A cost-utility analysis based on data from the AOSpine North America prospective CSM study. J Neurosurg Spine 2012 17(1 Suppl):89-93.
7. Kato S, Nouri A, Wu D, et al. Comparison of anterior and posterior surgery for degenerative cervical myelopathy: an MRI-based propensity-score-matched analysis using data from the prospective multicenter AOSpine CSM North America and International Studies. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2017 99:1013-21.
8. Herdmann J, Linzbach M, Krzan M, et al. The European myelopathy score. In: Baucher BL, Brock M, Klinger M editors. Advances in neurosurgery. Berlin: Springer; 1994. p.266-8.
9. Hackett NJ, De Oliveira GS, Jain UK, et al. ASA class is a reliable independent predictor of medical complications and mortality following surgery. Int J Surg 2015 18:184-90.
12. Fujiyoshi T, Yamazaki M, Kawabe J, et al. A new concept for making decisions regarding the surgical approach for cervical ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament: the K-line. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2008 33:E990-3.
14. Finn RH. A note on estimating the reliability of categorical data. Educ Psychol Meas 1970 30:71-6.
15. Light RJ. Measures of response agreement for qualitative data: some generalizations and alternatives. Psychol Bull 1971 76:365-77.
17. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977 33:159-74.
18. Gamer M. Irr: various coefficients of interrater reliability and agreement. R package ver. 0.5. Vienna (Austria): R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2005.
19. Naderi S, Benzel EC, Baldwin NG. Cervical spondylotic myelopathy: surgical decision making. Neurosurg Focus 1996 1:e1.
24. Sevki K, Mehmet T, Ufuk T, et al. Results of surgical treatment for degenerative cervical myelopathy: anterior cervical corpectomy and stabilization. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2004 29:2493-500.
26. Singh K, Vaccaro AR, Kim J, et al. Biomechanical comparison of cervical spine reconstructive techniques after a multilevel corpectomy of the cervical spine. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2003 28:2352-8.