ArticleSpinal cord2017
Correlates of self-reported physical function in individuals with spinal cord injuries and disorders: does self-efficacy matter?
Article in Spinal cord, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Physical health among the Finnish spinal cord injury population according to the Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS®).The journal of spinal cord medicine · 2022Observational
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designData were collected via a cross-sectional mailed survey with Veterans with spinal cord injury and disorders (SCI/D).
objectivesTo examine self-efficacy in Veterans with SCI/D reporting high versus low perceptions of physical function.
settingDepartment of Veterans Affairs (VA) Spinal Cord Injury System of Care-nation-wide, 24 Spinal Cord Injury (SCI) Centers.
methodsThe survey provided patient-reported data on demographic and injury characteristics, basic mobility and fine motor function, and perceived self-efficacy. Bivariate comparisons were conducted to compare perceptions of self-efficacy between Veterans with SCI/D reporting perceptions of 'high' versus 'low' basic mobility and fine motor function. A multivariate logistic regression was conducted to identify factors independently associated with high physical function when controlling for covariates.
resultsResponse rate (896/1452=61.7%). Multivariate analysis showed that age (odds ratio (OR)=0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.96-1.00, P=0.03), tetraplegia (OR=0.20, 95% CI: 0.13-0.32, P⩽0.0001), diabetes (OR=0.53, 95% CI: 0.31-0.91, P=0.02), depression (OR=0.62, 95% CI: 0.39-0.98, P=0.04) and pressure ulcers (OR=0.42, 95% CI: 0.25-0.72, P=0.001) were all independently associated with lower odds of high physical function. When controlling for covariates, persons with high self-efficacy were nearly two times more likely to have high physical function (OR=1.98, 95% CI: 1.22-3.22, P=0.01).
conclusionLower perceptions of basic mobility and fine motor function among individuals with SCI/D were correlated with lower self-efficacy, even when controlling for other covariates. The relationship between physical function and self-efficacy suggests that interventions focused on improving self-efficacy or physical function may also see improvements in the other. Further, studies exploring the impact of interventions on the relationship between self-efficacy and physical function are needed to understand the relationship between the two.
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.