ArticleSpinal cord series and cases2017
Pulse article: Survey on the current usage of the International Standards for the Assessment of Autonomic Function after Spinal Cord Injury (ISAFSCI).
Article in Spinal cord series and cases, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Novel Testing Battery for Preserved Autonomic Regulation Following Spinal Cord Injury and New Translationally Focused Data Representation.Topics in spinal cord injury rehabilitation · 2025Article
- How to learn the International Standards to document remaining Autonomic Function after Spinal Cord Injury (ISAFSCI) content: Self-study through booklet is not enough.The journal of spinal cord medicine · 2022Article
- Exploring the vagus nerve and the inflammatory reflex for therapeutic benefit in chronic spinal cord injury.Current opinion in neurology · 2022Review
- What should be clarified when learning the International Standards to Document Remaining Autonomic Function after Spinal Cord Injury (ISAFSCI) among medical students.Spinal cord series and cases · 2021Review
- Assessing the ability of the Sacral Autonomic Standards to document bladder and bowel function based upon the Asia Impairment Scale.Spinal cord series and cases · 2019Article
- Awards and updates.Spinal cord series and cases · 2018Article
- International Standards to document Autonomic Function following SCI (ISAFSCI): Second Edition.Topics in spinal cord injury rehabilitationArticle
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designOnline questionnaire.
objectivesTo identify the awareness, and current use, of the International Standards for the Assessment of Autonomic Function after SCI (ISAFSCI) and suggest necessary revisions.
settingAn international collaboration of committee members.
methodsA survey was drafted and consensus achieved among members of the International Standards Committee of the ASIA. The questionnaire was posted on SurveyMonkey for 2 months. A survey link was posted on the ASIA and ISCoS websites, and committee members circulated the survey to colleagues with the goal of obtaining a wide-spread international response.
resultsA total of 173 providers responded. About half (
conclusionThe ISAFSCI is used by a subset of SCI clinicians. Some find the standards useful, while others are unaware of the utility of the ISAFSCI to prevent morbidity and assist in documentation of autonomic recovery post SCI. Further clarification regarding the definition of various disorders, and how and why to use the ISAFSCI in the SCI population, is needed.
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.