ArticleIranian journal of nursing and midwifery research2014
What are the people's attitudes toward spinal cord injury victims (from common to elite).
Article in Iranian journal of nursing and midwifery research, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Public community knowledge regarding multidisciplinary rehabilitation of spinal cord injury in Lebanon: a cross-sectional study.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Barriers and Facilitators during Community Reintegration of People with Spinal Cord Injury: A Qualitative Study.Journal of caring sciences · 2024Article
- The Role of Environmental Factors on Health Conditions, General Health and Quality of Life in Persons with Spinal Cord Injuries in South Africa.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Psychosocial challenges of social reintegration for people with spinal cord injury: a qualitative study.Spinal cord · 2020Article
- Family-centered empowerment process in individuals with spinal cord injury living in Iran: a grounded theory study.Spinal cord · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOne of the acutely fatal and prevalent crises in all societies is acute spinal cord injury. Individuals with a spinal cord injury are prone to numerous challenges, perturbation, and acute mental distresses. One of their concerns, often expressed generally and in the form of a complaint, is how people deal with them. The present study aims to analyze the experiences and interactions of the disabled with the society and to achieve a deep clarification of their internal attitudes and realistic approaches in various social classes (from common people to elite). MATERIALS AND
methodsThe present study is a part of a greater research with a classical grounded theory approach conducted on 12 successful and nationally and internationally popular disabled people. Sampling was firstly purposive and then continued with snowball sampling. The data were collected by open deep interviews which were recorded and transcribed verbatim. The obtained data were analyzed by Graneheim content analysis method.
resultsThe findings obtained through analysis of the interviews yielded the theme of a socially suppressing attitude which contained four subthemes of compassionate attitude, disability attitude, inhuman attitude, and atonement attitude.
conclusionsThe results showed that both groups of common, and educated and elite classes of Iranian society have identically suppressing attitudes and interactions toward spinal cord injury victims. It seems that traditional attitudes yet preponderate academic and scientific knowledge in Iranian society. This gap needs notable attention of all the Iranians, especially policy makers and social personalities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24949065PMC4061627W1552823351What 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.