Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17923844›Full record

SynthesisSpinal cord2008

A systematic review of functional ambulation outcome measures in spinal cord injury.

T Lam, V K Noonan, J J Eng, SCIRE Research Team

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Spinal cord, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 132 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
132citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

132 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Walking Ability Outcome Measures in Individuals with Spinal Cord Injury: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

72 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

T LamSchool of Human Kinetics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. tania.lam@ubc.ca
V K Noonan
J J Eng
SCIRE Research Team

Funding

CIHR 63617
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

STUDY

designSystematic review.

objectivesTo systematically review the psychometric properties of outcome measures used to assess ambulation in people with spinal cord injury (SCI).

settingVancouver, BC, Canada.

methodsA keyword literature search of original articles that evaluated the psychometric properties of ambulation outcome measures in the SCI population was conducted using multiple databases. Multidimensional scales of function were included if specific data were available on ambulation-related subscales. Reliability, validity and responsiveness values were extracted and conclusions drawn about the psychometric quality of each measure.

resultsSeven outcome measures were identified and were broadly categorized into timed and categorical measures of ambulation. Timed measures included timed walking tests that showed excellent reliability, construct validity and responsiveness to change. The psychometric properties of the categorical scales were more variable, but those that were developed specifically for the SCI population had excellent reliability and validity. Categorical scales also exhibited some floor or ceiling effects.

conclusionExcellent tools are available for measuring functional ambulation capacity. Further work is required to develop and evaluate outcome measures to include environmental factors that contribute to the ability to achieve safe, functional ambulation in everyday settings.

Indexed as

Outcome Assessment, Health CareHumansPredictive Value of TestsPsychometricsRecovery of FunctionReproducibility of ResultsSpinal Cord InjuriesWalking

Identifiers

PMID17923844
PMCPMC3095631

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.