Skip to content
EvidenceHelixEvidenceLib · Scientific Encyclopedia
⌘ K

Scientific library

EvidenceLib encyclopediaAll articles A–Z2,100Open textbooks2Cancer study catalog458How it is made

My workspace this browser

Saved pages0Notes & annotations0

Recently viewed

Explore by field

Cancer and Oncology107Genetics and Genomics95Neuroscience110Cardiovascular Medicine105Immunology90Pharmacology99Molecular Biology100Infectious Diseases102Rare and Inherited Diseases106Clinical Research98Anatomy and Physiology542Drugs and Chemicals546
Plans & pricingCompare EvidenceHelix workspace plans
Library›EvidenceLib›Anatomy and Physiology›Cervical Vertebrae
Explore more with EvidenceHelix Workspace

Compare studies, analyze evidence and create research reports with premium tools.

Explore Researcher plans

Research reading room

Cervical Vertebrae

Anatomy and Physiology · NLM MeSH · updated 2026-10-31 · version 1

Citations verified against PubMedNot yet clinician-reviewed10 referencesApproximately 4 min read

The first seven vertebrae of the spinal column, which correspond to the vertebrae of the NECK.

Table of Contents

1. Definition2. Research landscape3. Reading the evidence4. Open-access studies5. Key reviews6. References7. About this article

Definition and research guide

This page combines a MeSH definition, publication statistics and selected research abstracts. It is a starting point for reading the literature, not a medical textbook or a systematic evidence review.

Content available: 4 complete abstracts (851 words), 10 references. Full article text is not stored or reproduced here; follow the PMID, DOI or PMC links to read the original sources and their access terms.

Definition

The first seven vertebrae of the spinal column, which correspond to the vertebrae of the NECK.

Definition: NLM Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) scope note (Public domain (U.S. National Library of Medicine); attribution requested). View the MeSH record.

Also known as: Vertebrae, Cervical; Cervical Spine; Cervical Spines; Spine, Cervical.

Where it fits in the MeSH classification

Broader topics
Spine
Narrower topics
Axis, Cervical Vertebra; Cervical Atlas

Related concepts

  • Vertebrae
  • Spinal Column

Research landscape

PubMed indexes 48,535 records tagged with the MeSH heading “Cervical Vertebrae” (counts retrieved 2026-10-31). 9,211 of them (19.0%) were published from 2020 onward, and the busiest period so far is through 1999 with 15,100 records.

Reviews account for 4,601 records (9.5%) and meta-analyses for 521. Randomized controlled trials number 1,129 (2.3%) as a share of all records on the topic.

PubMed records by publication periodthrough 1999: 15,100 records; 2000-2009: 10,225 records; 2010-2019: 13,999 records; 2020 onward: 9,211 records15,100through 199910,2252000-200913,9992010-20199,2112020 onward
Records in PubMed indexed with this heading, by publication period. Real counts from NCBI E-utilities; the final period covers only part of the current year. Volume reflects how much has been published, not how strong the evidence is.
Show the data
PeriodRecords
through 199915,100
2000-200910,225
2010-201913,999
2020 onward9,211
Share of records by publication typeReviews: 9.5 percent; Meta-analyses: 1.1 percent; Randomized controlled trials: 2.3 percentReviews9.5% (4,601)Meta-analyses1.1% (521)Randomized controlled trials2.3% (1,129)
Share of all PubMed records on this heading that carry each publication type. Types overlap with other records, so the shares do not sum to 100%.
Publication-type chart data
Publication types among 48,535 PubMed records
TypeRecordsShare
Reviews4,6019.5%
Meta-analyses5211.1%
Randomized controlled trials1,1292.3%

Method: PubMed query "Cervical Vertebrae"[MeSH Terms] with publication-type and date filters, retrieved 2026-10-31.

Reading the evidence in anatomy and physiology

Anatomy describes how body structures are built and physiology describes how they normally work, so most findings here are descriptive or mechanistic rather than evidence about treatment. Much of what is known comes from dissection, imaging, tissue studies and experiments in animals, and measurements in healthy volunteers can differ from those in people with disease or at different ages. Normal ranges vary between individuals and populations. Check whether a result was measured in people or in another species, the age and health of the participants, and the method used.

Evidence from open-access studies

These open-access studies come from PubMed’s best-match results for this heading (papers whose main topic it is), ranked here by citation count, with one recent addition. Each abstract is reproduced in full under its recorded open licence so that you can read the authors’ own words. They illustrate the literature; they are not a systematic summary of it. Citation counts measure attention, not reliability or clinical benefit.

Study comparison — selected abstracts, not a systematic review
Study / authorsYearSource label / designEurope PMC citationsLicence / source
Assessing the diagnostic accuracy of symptoms and signs of degenerative cervical myelopathy: A prospective study
Soufi K, Ortuno O, Castillo JA, de Souza NFS, Perez T, Ghabussi G, et al.
2025Research article
Design not recorded in structured metadata
5cc by
PMID 41131090 · DOI · PMC12550042
Neural tension patterns during cervical spine rotation: diagnostic implications from a cadaveric study
Alvarez D, Sillevis R, Cuenca Zaldívar JN, Sánchez Romero EA
2025Research article
Design not recorded in structured metadata
5cc by
PMID 41068778 · DOI · PMC12512937
Rehabilitation for degenerative cervical myelopathy: systematic review and scoping review of UK patient information
Smith TO, Newton C, Farrell A, Boby J, Dove J, Dove F, et al.
2025Systematic review
Design not recorded in structured metadata
4cc by
PMID 40696144 · DOI · PMC12413311
How I do it: intracranially extended C2 schwannoma resection with tailored craniectomy
Gelmini L, Piazza A, Fontanella MM, Agosti E
2026Research article
Design not recorded in structured metadata
1cc by
PMID 42098396 · DOI · PMC13337630

Assessing the diagnostic accuracy of symptoms and signs of degenerative cervical myelopathy: A prospective study [1]

Research article Soufi K, Ortuno O, Castillo JA, de Souza NFS, Perez T, Ghabussi G, et al. · · 2025 · cited 5 times (Europe PMC)

Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
Opening excerpt
Degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is a clinical diagnosis based on history, physical exam, and imaging, but standardized criteria have not been established, contributing to diagnostic delays.
Closing excerpt
These findings offer guidance for clinicians and the development of diagnostic criteria.
Interpretation limits
Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (199 words)

Degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is a clinical diagnosis based on history, physical exam, and imaging, but standardized criteria have not been established, contributing to diagnostic delays. We conducted a prospective study of DCM and healthy subjects that comprehensively evaluated symptoms, patient-reported and clinician-administered outcome measures, and physical assessments of motor and sensory function.Diagnostic utility was evaluated using Youden's Index (YI=sensitivity+specificity-1). 139 DCM patients and 108 age-matched healthy subjects were compared. Distinguishing symptoms included neck pain (YI=63%), upper extremity (UE) numbness (YI=57%), hand clumsiness (YI=50%), walking imbalance (YI=50%), and UE weakness (YI=46%). Questionnaires performed well including mJOA (YI=72%), NDI (YI=63%), and EQ-5D (YI=57%). Physical testing showed best results with UE reflexes (YI=54%), strength in 5 UE muscle groups (YI=53%), Berg Balance scale (YI=50%), self-paced walking velocity (YI=48%), and tandem gait assessment (YI=40%). Hand dexterity, strength dynamometry, and testing of 5 sensory modalities demonstrated poor diagnostic utility. Diagnosis of DCM is challenging, but key symptoms include neck pain, UE weakness, and those captured by the mJOA (particularly UE numbness, hand clumsiness, and walking imbalance). Physical testing of reflexes, manual motor testing, and gait/balance are useful to confirm the diagnosis. These findings offer guidance for clinicians and the development of diagnostic criteria.

Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 41131090 · DOI · PMC12550042

Neural tension patterns during cervical spine rotation: diagnostic implications from a cadaveric study [2]

Research article Alvarez D, Sillevis R, Cuenca Zaldívar JN, Sánchez Romero EA · · 2025 · cited 5 times (Europe PMC)

Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
Opening excerpt
BackgroundCervical neural tension reflects the biomechanical and physiological responses of spinal nerves to positional changes.
Closing excerpt
These results lay the groundwork for refining neurodynamic assessments and warrant further in vivo investigation.
Interpretation limits
Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (323 words)

BackgroundCervical neural tension reflects the biomechanical and physiological responses of spinal nerves to positional changes. Although clinical tests exist for the lower cervical spinal nerve, tension patterns in the upper and mid-cervical nerves remain underexplored, limiting the diagnostic accuracy for conditions such as occipital neuralgia.MethodsThis cadaveric study quantified tensile load changes at the cervical spinal nerve level (C1-C5) during passive cervical spine rotation in five formalin-embalmed cadavers. Tension was measured on the cervical spinal nerves (C1-C5) using force gauges attached proximal to the division between the dorsal and ventral rami. C1 measurements were obtained from a single specimen. Two movement conditions were used: cervical flexion-rotation for C1-C3 and neutral-plane rotation for C4-C5.ResultsIpsilateral increases in neural tension were observed in C1-C3 during flexion-rotation movements. By contrast, C4-C5 exhibited a consistent pattern of contralateral load increase during rotation in the neutral plane. Statistically significant variations in the tensile load were observed at the C5 level under different rotation conditions, specifically at C5 left (p = 0.003) and C5 right (p = 0.006). Post-hoc analyses of C5 measurements during neutral-plane rotation revealed significant differences between right and left rotation (p = 0.018) and between left rotation and neutral rotation (p = 0.018) on the left side, as well as between right rotation and left rotation and neutral rotation (p = 0.026, p = 0.024) on the right side. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) indicated good-to-excellent reliability (ICC > 0.75), particularly at C2-C5.ConclusionsCervical rotation influenced neural tension, with distinct patterns observed between the upper cervical segments (tested under flexion-rotation) and the middle cervical segments (tested under neutral plane rotation). These exploratory findings suggest that replacing lateral neck flexion with rotation in the upper-limb tension test may represent a promising direction for future research. Additionally, the flexion-rotation test may provide a basis for clinical validation as a potential indicator of greater occipital nerve tension. These results lay the groundwork for refining neurodynamic assessments and warrant further in vivo investigation.

Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 41068778 · DOI · PMC12512937

Rehabilitation for degenerative cervical myelopathy: systematic review and scoping review of UK patient information [3]

Systematic review Smith TO, Newton C, Farrell A, Boby J, Dove J, Dove F, et al. · · 2025 · cited 4 times (Europe PMC)

Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
Opening excerpt
Study designSystematic Literature Review & Patient-Information Scoping Review OBJECTIVES: To assess the evidence on prehabilitation and post-operative rehabilitation interventions for people undergoing surgery for degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) and to determine what publicly accessible information is provided to patients from the NHS surrounding DCM surgery.
Closing excerpt
RegistrationPROSPERO (CRD42024604184).
Interpretation limits
Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (246 words)

Study designSystematic Literature Review & Patient-Information Scoping Review OBJECTIVES: To assess the evidence on prehabilitation and post-operative rehabilitation interventions for people undergoing surgery for degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) and to determine what publicly accessible information is provided to patients from the NHS surrounding DCM surgery.MethodsA systematic literature review was searched from inception to 19 May 2025. Studies reporting pain, function, disability or quality of life for prehabilitation or post-operative rehabilitation interventions for people undergoing DCM surgery were eligible. Downs and Black appraisal tool was used to assess study quality. Data were analysed in a narrative analysis. Secondary, a review of UK NHS Patient Information Documents (PID) was searched using a Google platform assessment. PID reporting prehabilitation or post-operative information for people awaiting DCM surgery were included. The type of information being provided were extracted and descriptive statistics were used to report frequency of information provision.ResultsFrom 5218 screened studies, six studies (n = 685) met the eligibility criteria. The evidence was low to moderate in quality. Rehabilitation offered demonstrated improved clinical outcomes but there was limited evidence compared to non-rehabilitation or superiority between different rehabilitation strategies. The PID review identified 38 documents. This indicates education and guidance is commonly offered on returning to work (68%), driving (76%) and normal activities of daily living (63%).ConclusionThere remains uncertainty on what should be and is offered to patients with DCM in respect to prehabilitation or post-operative rehabilitation. Robust clinical trial evidence on rehabilitation approaches for this population is needed.RegistrationPROSPERO (CRD42024604184).

Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 40696144 · DOI · PMC12413311

How I do it: intracranially extended C2 schwannoma resection with tailored craniectomy [4]

Research article Gelmini L, Piazza A, Fontanella MM, Agosti E · · 2026 · cited 1 times (Europe PMC)

Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
Opening excerpt
BackgroundC2 schwannomas are rare neoplasms presenting with variable extensions.
Closing excerpt
ConclusionA tailored craniectomy adapted to the lesion intracranial extension enables a safe and effective resection of selected extradural, multicompartmental, cranially extended C2 schwannomas.
Interpretation limits
Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (83 words)

BackgroundC2 schwannomas are rare neoplasms presenting with variable extensions. Their possible intracranial involvement and close relationship with the V3 segment of the vertebral artery (VA) require a personalized and delicate surgical approach.MethodWe describe the resection steps of an extradural C2 schwannoma with intracranial extension. Indications, advantages, and approach-specific complications are discussed. The main surgical steps are illustrated in an operative video.ConclusionA tailored craniectomy adapted to the lesion intracranial extension enables a safe and effective resection of selected extradural, multicompartmental, cranially extended C2 schwannomas.

Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 42098396 · DOI · PMC13337630

Key reviews and meta-analyses

The most cited review-type papers among PubMed’s best-match results for this heading, listed with bibliographic details only. Follow the links for the full text and access terms.

  • Research article Anterior approach versus posterior approach for the treatment of multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a systemic review and meta-analysis [5]
    Zhu B, Xu Y, Liu X, Liu Z, Dang G · Eur Spine J · 2013 · cited 117 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article Total disc replacement versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a systematic review with meta-analysis of data from a total of 3160 patients across 14 randomized controlled trials with both short- and medium- to long-term outcomes [6]
    Findlay C, Ayis S, Demetriades AK · Bone Joint J · 2018 · cited 112 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article Meta-analysis of normative cervical motion [7]
    Chen J, Solinger AB, Poncet JF, Lantz CA · Spine (Phila Pa 1976) · 1999 · cited 110 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article Prevalence of C5 nerve root palsy after cervical decompressive surgery: a meta-analysis [8]
    Shou F, Li Z, Wang H, Yan C, Liu Q, Xiao C · Eur Spine J · 2015 · cited 106 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article Anterior corpectomy versus posterior laminoplasty for multilevel cervical myelopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis [9]
    Liu X, Min S, Zhang H, Zhou Z, Wang H, Jin A · Eur Spine J · 2014 · cited 100 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article A meta-analysis of autograft versus allograft in anterior cervical fusion [10]
    Floyd T, Ohnmeiss D · Eur Spine J · 2000 · cited 100 times (Europe PMC)

References

  1. Soufi K, Ortuno O, Castillo JA, de Souza NFS, Perez T, Ghabussi G, et al.. Assessing the diagnostic accuracy of symptoms and signs of degenerative cervical myelopathy: A prospective study. . 2025. PMID 41131090 · DOI · PMC12550042
  2. Alvarez D, Sillevis R, Cuenca Zaldívar JN, Sánchez Romero EA. Neural tension patterns during cervical spine rotation: diagnostic implications from a cadaveric study. . 2025. PMID 41068778 · DOI · PMC12512937
  3. Smith TO, Newton C, Farrell A, Boby J, Dove J, Dove F, et al.. Rehabilitation for degenerative cervical myelopathy: systematic review and scoping review of UK patient information. . 2025. PMID 40696144 · DOI · PMC12413311
  4. Gelmini L, Piazza A, Fontanella MM, Agosti E. How I do it: intracranially extended C2 schwannoma resection with tailored craniectomy. . 2026. PMID 42098396 · DOI · PMC13337630
  5. Zhu B, Xu Y, Liu X, Liu Z, Dang G. Anterior approach versus posterior approach for the treatment of multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a systemic review and meta-analysis. Eur Spine J. 2013. PMID 23657624 · DOI · PMC3698351
  6. Findlay C, Ayis S, Demetriades AK. Total disc replacement versus anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a systematic review with meta-analysis of data from a total of 3160 patients across 14 randomized controlled trials with both short- and medium- to long-term outcomes. Bone Joint J. 2018. PMID 30062947 · DOI
  7. Chen J, Solinger AB, Poncet JF, Lantz CA. Meta-analysis of normative cervical motion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1999. PMID 10457577 · DOI
  8. Shou F, Li Z, Wang H, Yan C, Liu Q, Xiao C. Prevalence of C5 nerve root palsy after cervical decompressive surgery: a meta-analysis. Eur Spine J. 2015. PMID 26281981 · DOI
  9. Liu X, Min S, Zhang H, Zhou Z, Wang H, Jin A. Anterior corpectomy versus posterior laminoplasty for multilevel cervical myelopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Spine J. 2014. PMID 24097230 · DOI · PMC3906468
  10. Floyd T, Ohnmeiss D. A meta-analysis of autograft versus allograft in anterior cervical fusion. Eur Spine J. 2000. PMID 11057533 · DOI · PMC3611378

About this article

Sources
NLM Medical Subject Headings (definition, synonyms); NCBI PubMed (counts, identifiers); Europe PMC (open-access abstracts and citation counts).
Verification
Every reference was resolved against PubMed on 2026-10-31; title, year and DOI matched.
Review state
automated source verified; no human expert review has been recorded yet.
Version
1, last updated 2026-10-31.

See how EvidenceLib is built. Spotted an error? Email support@evidencehelix.com.

Evidence strength

EvidenceHelix's computed view of the study designs behind this topic: how common meta-analyses, randomized trials and reviews are, how recent the literature is, and a plain-language reading. It describes the design mix of the literature. It is not a quality appraisal of any study, and it is not medical advice.

Included with the Researcher plan

Reading every article stays free. This computed view is part of the paid plans.

See plans Sign in

Your notes

Notes and highlights stay in this browser only; they are not sent to EvidenceHelix.

Related research topics

  • Thoracic VertebraeAnatomy and Physiology
  • Hyoid BoneAnatomy and Physiology
  • Lumbar VertebraeAnatomy and Physiology
  • Foramen MagnumAnatomy and Physiology
  • SacrumAnatomy and Physiology
  • AcetabulumAnatomy and Physiology

All 542 articles in Anatomy and Physiology →

At a glance

48,535
PubMed records on this heading
19%
published since 2020
4,601
review articles
1,129
randomized trials
10
verified references below

Counts come from PubMed on 2026-10-31; they show how much has been written, not how strong the evidence is.

Related topics See all →

  • Thoracic VertebraeAnatomy and Physiology
  • Hyoid BoneAnatomy and Physiology
  • Lumbar VertebraeAnatomy and Physiology
  • Foramen MagnumAnatomy and Physiology
  • SacrumAnatomy and Physiology

My notes & annotations (0)

Nothing yet. Select text and press Highlight, or write a note in the Notes tab. Stored in this browser only.

Sources

  • NLM MeSH record ↗
  • PubMed search used ↗

EvidenceLib is a research-education resource, not medical advice. It does not diagnose, prescribe or recommend starting, stopping or changing any treatment. Talk to a qualified clinician about your own situation. Methods, sources and licences · Legal · Support