To systematically review the literature and anatomical atlases on LM morphology. Relevant studies were searched in PubMed (Medline) and Science Direct. Anatomical atlases were retrieved from multiple university libraries and online. Included atlases and studies were assessed at five items: visuals present(y/n), quality of visuals(in-/sufficient), labelling of multifidus (y/n), clear description of region of interest(y/n), description of plane has been described(y/n). This risk of bias assessment tool was developed to assess the quality of description of anatomy, since existing risk of bias tables have only been developed to assess the methodology of studies.Aim
Methods
