ReviewNeurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology2017
Motor exam of patients with spinal cord injury: a terminological imbroglio.
Review in Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Robotic-assisted versus free-hand techniques in adult spinal deformity surgery: a comparative analysis of postoperative outcomes.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Development of machine learning models for gait-based classification of incomplete spinal cord injuries and cauda equina syndrome.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- [Inhibitory effect of miR-429 on expressions of ZO-1, Occludin, and Claudin-5 proteins to improve the permeability of blood spinal cord barrierZhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2020Article
- Efficacy of chitosan and sodium alginate scaffolds for repair of spinal cord injury in rats.Neural regeneration research · 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
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The description of the motor deficit of patients with spinal cord injury (SCI) varies significantly, leading to confusion within the neurological terminology. This paper proposes a concise and easy to use terminology to describe the motor deficit of patients with SCI. A broad review of the origin of the nomenclature used to describe the motor deficit of patients with SCI was performed and discussed. The prefix: "hemi" should be used to describe paralysis of one half of the body; "mono" for one limb; "para" for lower limbs, di" for two symmetrical segments and/or parts in both sides of the body; "tri" for three limbs, or two limbs and one side of the face; and "tetra" for four limbs. The suffix: "plegia" should be used for total paralysis of a limb or part of the body, and "paresis" for partial paralysis. The term "brachial" refers to the upper limbs; and "podal" to the lower limbs. According to the spinal cord origin of the main key muscles for the limbs, patients with complete injury affecting spinal cord segments C1-5 usually presents with "tetraplegia"; C6-T1 presents with "paraplegia and brachial diparesis"; T2-L2 with "paraplegia"; and L3-S1 with "paraparesis".
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.