Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20367251›Full record

SynthesisJournal of neurotrauma2011

Assessment of disability in patients with acute traumatic spinal cord injury: a systematic review of the literature.

Julio C Furlan, Vanessa Noonan, Anoushka Singh, Michael G Fehlings

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of neurotrauma, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 89 citations in OpenAlex.

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

Julio C FurlanDepartment of Genetics and Development, Toronto Western Research Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Vanessa Noonan
Anoushka Singh
Michael G Fehlings
University Health Network · CAUniversity of British Columbia · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Given the importance of accurately and reliably assessing disability in future clinical trials, which will test therapeutic strategies in acute spinal cord injury (SCI), we sought to appraise comprehensively studies that focused on the psychometric properties (i.e., reliability, validity, and responsiveness) of all previously used outcome measures in the SCI population. The search strategy included Medline, CINAHL, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases. Two reviewers independently assessed each study regarding eligibility, level of evidence (using Sackett's criteria), and quality. Of 363 abstracts captured in our search, 36 full articles fulfilled the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Eight different outcome measures were used to assess disability in the SCI population, including Functional Independence Measure (FIM), Spinal cord Injury Measure (SCIM), Walking Index for Spinal Cord Injury (WISCI), Quadriplegia Index of Function (QIF), Modified Barthel Index (MBI), Timed Up & Go (TUG), 6-min walk test (6MWT), and 10-m walk test (10MWT). While 19 of 36 studies provided level-4 evidence, the remaining 17 articles were classified as level-2b evidence. Most of the instruments showed convergent construct validity in the SCI population, but criterion validity was not examined due to the lack a gold standard for assessment of disability. All instruments were tested in the rehabilitation and/or community setting, but only FIM was examined in the acute care setting. Based on our results of quality assessment, the SCIM has the most appropriate performance regarding the instrument's psychometric properties. Nonetheless, further investigations are required to confirm the adequate performance of the SCIM as a comprehensive measure of functional recovery in patients with SCI in rehabilitative care. The expert panel of the Spinal Cord Injury Solutions Network (SCISN) that participated in the modified Delphi process endorsed these conclusions.

Indexed as

Disability EvaluationPersons with DisabilitiesHumansRecovery of FunctionSpinal Cord Injuries

Identifiers

PMID20367251
PMCPMC3143412
OpenAlexW2385312800

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.