ArticleTopics in spinal cord injury rehabilitation2014
Review of cross-cultural issues related to quality of life after spinal cord injury.
Article in Topics in spinal cord injury rehabilitation, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Longitudinal measurement invariance of the international spinal cord injury quality of life basic data set (SCI-QoL-BDS) during spinal cord injury/disorder inpatient rehabilitation.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2022Article
- Internal consistency and convergent validity of the International Spinal Cord Injury Quality of Life Basic Data Set at discharge from first rehabilitation.Spinal cord · 2022Article
- A cross-cultural mixed methods validation study of the spinal cord injury quality of life basic dataset (SCI QoL-BDS).Spinal cord · 2022Article
- Reproducibility of the international spinal cord injury quality of life basic data set: an international psychometric study.Spinal cord · 2019Article
- Quality of life and its predictors in people with traumatic spinal cord injury in mainland China.Spinal cord · 2019Article
- Preliminary psychometric analyses of the International Spinal Cord Injury Quality of Life Basic Data Set.Spinal cord · 2019Article
- A validity study of the Spanish-World Health Organization Quality of Life short version instrument in persons with traumatic spinal cord injury.Spinal cord · 2018Article
- Quality of life among individuals with rugby-related spinal cord injuries in South Africa: a descriptive cross-sectional study.BMJ open · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Quality of life (QOL) is a dynamic concept that means different things to different people, both in the general public and within the research community. Because of this, a common definition of QOL has been hard to achieve. This article reviews cross-cultural issues related to QOL research in spinal cord injury (SCI). Many factors influence QOL for persons with SCI, including observable and objective indicators and subjective self-report ones. The World Health Organization's International Classification of Function, Disability and Health is used in this article as a framework to better understand how these factors may influence QOL. A number of important steps are summarized with respect to measurement issues in QOL. A comparison between data from 2 countries (United States and Brazil) using the International SCI QOL Basic Data Set shows similarities in scores and good reliability in the Brazilian sample. Substantial, significant correlations were observed among the SCI QOL Basic Data Set items and the WHOQOL-BREF within the US sample. The article ends with a set of recommendations for the development of cross-cultural measures of QOL for use in the SCI population.
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.