ArticleSpinal cord2018
Administration of assessment instruments during the first rehabilitation of patients with spinal cord injury: a retrospective chart analysis.
Article in Spinal cord, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Twenty-five years after publication of the "International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health"-what research and practice can learn from each other].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2026Article
- An Evaluation of International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury (ISNCSCI) Performance Within the Canadian SCI Network.Topics in spinal cord injury rehabilitation · 2025Article
- German Transcreation of the International Standards to Document Remaining Autonomic Function After Spinal Cord Injury (Second Edition): A Feasibility Study in Individuals With Subacute Phase Spinal Cord Injury/Disease (SCI/D).Topics in spinal cord injury rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Assessments and interventions on body functions, structures and activity to prepare adults with acute spinal cord injury or disease for participation: a scoping review.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2024Article
- The Nottwil Standard-Development and Implementation of an International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health-Based Clinical Standard Assessment for Post-acute Rehabilitation After Newly Acquired Spinal Cord Injury.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2021Article
- International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury: factors influencing the frequency, completion and accuracy of documentation of neurology for patients with traumatic spinal cord injuries.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2019Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designRetrospective chart analysis.
objectivesTo examine which professionals administered which assessment instruments in which patient in clinical practice during first rehabilitation after newly acquired spinal cord injury (SCI) and the differences in the frequencies of different assessments between patient groups.
settingSpecialized SCI acute care and rehabilitation clinic.
methodsPatients after SCI, aged 18 years and above, admitted for first rehabilitation between December 2014 and December 2015 were analyzed. Descriptive statistics of 54 selected assessments. p values based on the χ
resultsOne hundred and nineteen patients were screened. Forty-one assessments were administered, of which 10 on average more than once per patient. The most frequently used assessments were Spinal Cord Independence Measure III (7.7 times per patient), Skin Assessment (3.6 times), and Manual Muscle Test (3.2 times for Lower Extremities; 2.5 times for Upper Extremities). The American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale was administered on average 1.9 times per patient. More variation in the number of assessments per patient was observed in patients with complete and incomplete lesions compared to patients with paraplegia and tetraplegia.
conclusionAssessments covering neurological functioning, mobility, and self-care are used in clinical practice during first rehabilitation of patients with SCI, while others covering autonomic functioning, pain, participation, or quality of life are still missing. Based on these observations and national and international requirements, a meaningful standard for an assessment toolkit, applicable in general and in specific subgroups, needs to be defined and implemented.
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.