Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28728503›Full record

ArticleJournal of neurotrauma2018

Facilitators and Barriers to International Collaboration in Spinal Cord Injury: Results from a Survey of Clinicians and Researchers.

Vanessa K Noonan, Elaine Chan, Kent Bassett-Spiers, David J Berlowitz, Fin Biering-Sørensen, Susan Charlifue, Marnie Graco, Keith C Hayes, Jane Horsewell, Phalgun Joshi and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neurotrauma, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Bridging the gap: understanding and enhancing the collaborative relationship between spine clinicians and researchers of the International Society for the Study of the Lumbar Spine (ISSLS).European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. A Narrative Review of Pediatric Nontraumatic Spinal Cord Dysfunction.Topics in spinal cord injury rehabilitation · 2019
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Vanessa K Noonan1 Rick Hansen Institute , Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada .
Elaine Chan1 Rick Hansen Institute , Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada .
Kent Bassett-Spiers2 Ontario Neurotrauma Foundation , Toronto, Ontario, Canada .
David J Berlowitz3 Institute for Breathing and Sleep , Austin Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia .
Fin Biering-Sørensen5 Clinic for Spinal Cord Injuries, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen , Copenhagen, Denmark .
Susan Charlifue6 Craig Hospital , Englewood, Colorado.
Marnie Graco3 Institute for Breathing and Sleep , Austin Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia .
Keith C Hayes2 Ontario Neurotrauma Foundation , Toronto, Ontario, Canada .
Jane Horsewell7 The European Spinal Cord Injury Federation , Nottwil, Switzerland .
Phalgun Joshi1 Rick Hansen Institute , Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada .
Debora Markelis8 Institute for Safety , Compensation and Recovery Research, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia .
Verna Smith8 Institute for Safety , Compensation and Recovery Research, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia .
Zeina Waheed1 Rick Hansen Institute , Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada .
Douglas J Brown4 Spinal Research Institute , Melbourne, Victoria, Australia .

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

International collaboration in spinal cord injury (SCI) research is necessary to overcome the challenges often encountered by clinicians and researchers, including participant recruitment, high cost, and the need for specialized expertise. However, international collaboration poses its own obstacles. The objective of this study was to conduct an international online survey to assess barriers and facilitators to international SCI clinical research, potential initiatives to facilitate future collaborations, and the use of SCI-specific data sets and standards. Results were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Of 364 total respondents, 213 completed the survey, with the majority of these participants based in North America (38%), Asia (22%), Europe (18%), and Oceania (16%). Over half had more than 10 years of experience in SCI research or clinical practice (57%) and 60% had previous experience with international collaborations. Funding was identified as a top barrier (82%), a facilitator (93%), and a proposed future initiative (97%). Communication and technology were also identified as strong facilitators and proposed future initiatives. The International Standards for Neurological Classification of SCI were used by 69% of participants, the International Standards to document remaining Autonomic Function after SCI by 13% of participants, and the International SCI Data Sets by 45% of participants. As the need for international collaborations in SCI research increases, it is important to identify how clinicians and researchers can be supported by SCI consumer and professional organizations, funders, and networks. Furthermore, unique solutions to overcome modifiable barriers and creation of new facilitators are also needed.

Indexed as

Interprofessional RelationsResearch DesignSpinal Cord InjuriesHumansSurveys and Questionnairesclinical researchinternational collaborationspinal cord injurystandardization

Identifiers

PMID28728503
PMCPMC5793947

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.