Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26099216›Full record

ArticleSpinal cord2016

Time-series analysis of the barriers for admission into a spinal rehabilitation unit.

P W New, M Akram

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Spinal cord, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

P W NewSpinal Rehabilitation Service, Caulfield Hospital, Alfred Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
M AkramDepartment of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health & Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Alfred Health · AUMonash University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

STUDY

designThis is a prospective open-cohort case series.

objectivesThe objective of this study was to assess changes over time in the duration of key acute hospital process barriers for patients with spinal cord damage (SCD) from admission until transfer into spinal rehabilitation unit (SRU) or other destinations.

settingThe study was conducted in Acute hospitals, Victoria, Australia (2006-2013).

methodsDuration of the following discrete sequential processes was measured: acute hospital admission until referral to SRU, referral until SRU assessment, SRU assessment until ready for SRU transfer and ready for transfer until SRU admission. Time-series analysis was performed using a generalised additive model (GAM). Seasonality of non-traumatic spinal cord dysfunction (SCDys) was examined.

resultsGAM analysis shows that the waiting time for admission into SRU was significantly (P<0.001) longer for patients who were female, who had tetraplegia, who were motor complete, had a pelvic pressure ulcer and who were referred from another health network. Age had a non-linear effect on the duration of waiting for transfer from acute hospital to SRU and both the acute hospital and SRU length of stay (LOS). The duration patients spent waiting for SRU admission increased over the study period. There was an increase in the number of referrals over the study period and an increase in the number of patients accepted but not admitted into the SRU. There was no notable seasonal influence on the referral of patients with SCDys.

conclusionsTime-series analysis provides additional insights into changes in the waiting times for SRU admission and the LOS in hospital for patients with SCD.

Indexed as

Waiting ListsAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAge DistributionEligibility DeterminationFemaleHospitalizationHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrevalenceReferral and ConsultationRehabilitation CentersSex Distribution

Identifiers

PMID26099216
OpenAlexW833693871

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.