ArticleSpinal cord series and cases2019
Survey on current treatments for pain after spinal cord damage.
Article in Spinal cord series and cases, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Use and experienced effectiveness of non-pharmacological treatments for chronic spinal cord injury related pain in The Netherlands: A cross-sectional survey.The journal of spinal cord medicine · 2025Article
- Analyzing the Impact of Cannabinoids on the Treatment of Spinal Disorders.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2022Review
- Using cannabis for pain management after spinal cord injury: a qualitative study.Spinal cord series and cases · 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
5 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Study design: An online questionnaire. Objectives: To assess the international spinal cord medicine and rehabilitation community's utilization of pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments for spinal cord damage (SCD)-related pain and to determine whether approaches to SCD-related pain differ between developed and less developed nations. Setting: An international collaboration of authors. Methods: An on-line survey querying availability and utilization of a number of approaches to SCD-related pain was developed, distributed, and made available for 6 months. Responses were analyzed for the entire cohort and according to participants' descriptions of their home nations' economies. Results: A total of 153 responses were submitted, mostly from developed nations. Nearly three quarters of subjects reported offering their patients with SCD narcotics; only 13% reported offering their patients with SCD medical cannabis. Subjects from developing countries were more likely than those from developed countries to prescribe buprenorphine (20.0% vs 15.6%; Conclusions: Most spinal cord medicine clinicians employ a multimodal approach to pain. There are significant differences in utilization of pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic approach to SCD-related pain between clinicians from more and less developed countries.
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.