ArticleSpinal cord series and cases2016
Spinal cord injury rehabilitation patient and physical therapist perspective: a pilot study.
Article in Spinal cord series and cases, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of healthcare professionals regarding neuropathic pain in spinal cord injury in Hunan, China.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Acute spinal cord injury: Pathophysiology and pharmacological intervention (Review).Molecular medicine reports · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedErratum for2016
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objectives of this retrospective observational study were to explore physical therapists' perceived involvement of patients with SCI in physical therapy (PT) rehabilitation, second to explore individuals with SCI perceived involvement in PT rehabilitation, third to compare how patients and physical therapists perceive involvement in PT rehabilitation and last to explore patients' perceived involvement with satisfaction with life (SWL). This study was conducted in the United States. Two 11-item questionnaires were designed one for physical therapists and one for patients. The items were rated on a Likert-type agreement scale. Thirty physical therapists completed the patient involvement questionnaire for physical therapists and nine individuals with SCI completed the patient involvement questionnaire and SWL scale. We certify that all applicable governmental and institutional guidelines were followed during the course of this research. The results indicated that both physical therapists and patients were overall in agreement that patients were involved in their PT rehabilitation on most items. The two items that received the lowest Likert scores by the therapists and patients were friends and family involvement in therapy and gender-related issues. The item, individualized patient goals, received the largest discrepancy between therapists and patients. The sample size was too small to observe a trend with SWL and perceived involvement. Patients and PTs from this pilot overall agree patients are included in treatment; however, the discrepancy in scores related to individualized goals requires further research.
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.