Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23685159›Full record

ReviewNeuroImage2014

The current state-of-the-art of spinal cord imaging: methods.

P W Stroman, C Wheeler-Kingshott, M Bacon, J M Schwab, R Bosma, J Brooks, D Cadotte, T Carlstedt, O Ciccarelli, J Cohen-Adad and 12 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in NeuroImage, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 154 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
154citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

154 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Spinal cord imaging in multiple sclerosis: A vital component we can no longer overlook.Multiple sclerosis (Houndmills, Basingstoke, England) · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. SV2A PET reveals synaptic density loss in experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis and in a pilot multiple sclerosis study.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

94 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

22 authors.

P W StromanCentre for Neuroscience Studies, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada. Electronic address: stromanp@queensu.ca.
C Wheeler-Kingshott
M Bacon
J M Schwab
R Bosma
J Brooks
D Cadotte
T Carlstedt
O Ciccarelli
J Cohen-Adad
A Curt
N Evangelou
M G Fehlings
M Filippi
B J Kelley
S Kollias
A Mackay
C A Porro
S Smith
S M Strittmatter
P Summers
I Tracey

Funding

Cortical Plasticity during Recovery from Spinal Cord InjuryR01NS080388 · NINDS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI STRITTMATTER, STEPHEN M · 2012 to 2016
$1.8M
Medical Research Council G0700238Medical Research Council G0700399NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS080388
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A first-ever spinal cord imaging meeting was sponsored by the International Spinal Research Trust and the Wings for Life Foundation with the aim of identifying the current state-of-the-art of spinal cord imaging, the current greatest challenges, and greatest needs for future development. This meeting was attended by a small group of invited experts spanning all aspects of spinal cord imaging from basic research to clinical practice. The greatest current challenges for spinal cord imaging were identified as arising from the imaging environment itself; difficult imaging environment created by the bone surrounding the spinal canal, physiological motion of the cord and adjacent tissues, and small cross-sectional dimensions of the spinal cord, exacerbated by metallic implants often present in injured patients. Challenges were also identified as a result of a lack of "critical mass" of researchers taking on the development of spinal cord imaging, affecting both the rate of progress in the field, and the demand for equipment and software to manufacturers to produce the necessary tools. Here we define the current state-of-the-art of spinal cord imaging, discuss the underlying theory and challenges, and present the evidence for the current and potential power of these methods. In two review papers (part I and part II), we propose that the challenges can be overcome with advances in methods, improving availability and effectiveness of methods, and linking existing researchers to create the necessary scientific and clinical network to advance the rate of progress and impact of the research.

Indexed as

Spinal CordHumansNeuroimagingSpinal Cord InjuriesArtifactsHumanImagingMagnetic resonancePhysiological motionPositron emission tomographySpectroscopySpinal cordSusceptibility

Identifiers

PMID23685159
PMCPMC4371133

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.