SynthesisThe journal of spinal cord medicine2013
Identifying and classifying quality-of-life tools for assessing pressure ulcers after spinal cord injury.
Synthesis in The journal of spinal cord medicine, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Identifying and Classifying Quality of Life Tools for Assessing Neurogenic Bowel Dysfunction After Spinal Cord Injury.Topics in spinal cord injury rehabilitation · 2019Pooled it
- Identifying and classifying quality of life tools for neurogenic bladder function after spinal cord injury: A systematic review.The journal of spinal cord medicine · 2017Pooled it
- Development and psychometric characteristics of the SCI-QOL Pressure Ulcers scale and short form.The journal of spinal cord medicine · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextAlthough pressure ulcers may negatively influence quality of life (QoL) post-spinal cord injury (SCI), our understanding of how to assess their impact is confounded by conceptual and measurement issues. To ensure that descriptions of pressure ulcer impact are appropriately characterized, measures should be selected according to the domains that they evaluate and the population and pathologies for which they are designed.
objectiveTo conduct a systematic literature review to identify and classify outcome measures used to assess the impact of pressure ulcers on QoL after SCI.
methodsElectronic databases (Medline/PubMed, CINAHL, and PsycInfo) were searched for studies published between 1975 and 2011. Identified outcome measures were classified as being either subjective or objective using a QoL model.
resultsFourteen studies were identified. The majority of tools identified in these studies did not have psychometric evidence supporting their use in the SCI population with the exception of two objective measures, the Short-Form 36 and the Craig Handicap Assessment and Reporting Technique, and two subjective measures, the Life Situation Questionnaire-Revised and the Ferrans and Powers Quality of Life Index SCI-Version.
conclusionMany QoL outcome tools showed promise in being sensitive to the presence of pressure ulcers, but few of them have been validated for use with SCI. Prospective studies should employ more rigorous methods for collecting data on pressure ulcer severity and location to improve the quality of findings with regard to their impact on QoL. The Cardiff Wound Impact Schedule is a potential tool for assessing impact of pressure ulcers-post SCI.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.