Trial reportPloS one2016
Patients with Spinal Cord Injuries Favor Administration of Methylprednisolone.
Trial report in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bridging the gap: a translational perspective in spinal cord injury.Experimental biology and medicine (Maywood, N.J.) · 2024Review
- Functional State of the Motor Centers of the Lumbar Spine after Contusion (Th8-Th9) with Application of Methylprednisolone-Copolymer at the Site of Injury.Biomedicines · 2023Article
- Recent advances in lipid nanovesicles for targeted treatment of spinal cord injury.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2023Review
- Drug delivery to the central nervous system.Nature reviews. Materials · 2022Article
- Acute spinal cord injury: Pathophysiology and pharmacological intervention (Review).Molecular medicine reports · 2021Review
- Factors related to improved American Spinal Injury Association grade of acute traumatic spinal cord injury.World journal of clinical cases · 2020Article
- Recent advances in nanotherapeutic strategies for spinal cord injury repair.Advanced drug delivery reviews · 2019Review
- Mechanism of Neuroprotection Against Experimental Spinal Cord Injury by Riluzole or Methylprednisolone.Neurochemical research · 2019Review
- Clinical Trials in Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2018Review
- Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor Combined with Methylprednisolone Improves Functional Outcomes in Rats with Experimental Acute Spinal Cord Injury.Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2018Article
- Efficacy and Safety of Methylprednisolone Sodium Succinate in Acute Spinal Cord Injury: A Systematic Review.Global spine journal · 2017Review
- Methylprednisolone for acute spinal cord injury: an increasingly philosophical debate.Neural regeneration research · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Methylprednisolone sodium succinate (MPSS) for treatment of acute spinal cord injury (SCI) has been associated with both benefits and adverse events. MPSS administration was the standard of care for acute SCI until recently when its use has become controversial. Patients with SCI have had little input in the debate, thus we sought to learn their opinions regarding administration of MPSS. A summary of the published literature to date on MPSS use for acute SCI was created and adjudicated by 28 SCI experts. This summary was then emailed to 384 chronic SCI patients along with a survey that interrogated the patients' neurological deficits, communication with physicians and their views on MPSS administration. 77 out of 384 patients completed the survey. 28 respondents indicated being able to speak early after injury and of these 24 reported arriving at the hospital within 8 hours of injury. One recalled a physician speaking to them about MPSS and one patient reported choosing whether or not to receive MPSS. 59.4% felt that the small neurological benefits associated with MPSS were 'very important' to them (p<0.0001). Patients had 'little concern' for potential side-effects of MPSS (p = 0.001). Only 1.4% felt that MPSS should not be given to SCI patients regardless of degree of injury (p<0.0001). This is the first study to report SCI patients' preferences regarding MPSS treatment for acute SCI. Patients favor the administration of MPSS for acute SCI, however few had input into whether or not it was administered. Conscious patients should be given greater opportunity to decide their treatment. These results also provide some guidance regarding MPSS administration in patients unable to communicate.
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.