ArticleJournal of neurotrauma2017
Optimizing Clinical Decision Making in Acute Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury.
Article in Journal of neurotrauma, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Does lack of brain injury mean lack of cognitive impairment in traumatic spinal cord injury?The journal of spinal cord medicine · 2022Article
- Translating promising strategies for bowel and bladder management in spinal cord injury.Experimental neurology · 2018Review
- Spinal Cord Injury Clinical Registries: Improving Care across the SCI Care Continuum by Identifying Knowledge Gaps.Journal of neurotrauma · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Spinal cord injury (SCI) is a devastating event causing lifelong disability that results in a significant decrease in quality of life and immense cost to the health care system, individuals and their families. Providing specialized and timely care can improve recovery and reduce costs, but to make this a reality requires understanding of the current care delivery processes and the care journey. The objective of this focus issue is to examine the current state of health care delivery and discover opportunities to improve access and timing to specialized care for individuals with tSCI. This issue provides an overview of care throughout the SCI continuum and its impact on individuals with tSCI using pan-Canadian data. The issue also presents findings from the RHI Access to Care and Timing (ACT) Project, a multi-center research study involving a multi-disciplinary team of Canadian researchers and clinicians. The initial articles describe the current state of the tSCI care journey including a comparison of environmental barriers, health status, and quality-of-life outcomes between patients living in rural and urban settings. The issue concludes with an article describing the national knowledge translation efforts of using the evidence from the articles published here to inform practice and policy change. Overall, this focus issue will be an excellent reference to guide and optimize evidence informed decision-making in the care of those with tSCI. The evidence can be transferred to care in non-traumatic SCI and other conditions that benefit from timely access to specialized care such as stroke and traumatic brain injury.
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.