ArticleEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2019
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.
Article in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multiroute administration of Wharton's jelly mesenchymal stem cells in chronic complete spinal cord injury: A phase I safety and feasibility study.World journal of stem cells · 2025Trial
- Long-term safety and clinical outcomes from a single-site phase 1 study of neural stem cell transplantation for chronic cervical spinal cord injury.Stem cell reports · 2026Article
- International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury: Case Examples Reinforcing Concepts From the 2019 Revision.Topics in spinal cord injury rehabilitation · 2025Article
- 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
- Article
- Concordance between the international standards for neurological classification of spinal cord injury motor examination and needle electromyography findings in muscles with a motor power grade of zero or trace.The journal of spinal cord medicine · 2023Article
- Computer International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury (ISNCSCI) algorithms: a review.Spinal cord · 2023Review
- The International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury: Classification Accuracy and Challenges.Topics in spinal cord injury rehabilitation · 2023Article
- Utility of transcranial magnetic stimulation in the assessment of spinal cord injury: Current status and future directions.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2022Review
- Characterizing Natural Recovery after Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury.Journal of neurotrauma · 2021Review
- Neurophysiological Changes in the First Year After Cell Transplantation in Sub-acute Complete Paraplegia.Frontiers in neurology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionWe aim to evaluate the effects of injury-related factors and clinician training grades on the frequency, completion and accuracy of International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury (ISNCSCI) charts in a tertiary care neurosurgery unit. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe retrospectively analysed 96 ISNCSCI charts of 24 traumatic spinal cord-injured (SCI) patients and 26 controls (vertebral fracture but neurologically intact), written by 50 clinicians. Seven components of each ISNCSCI charts (motor scores, sensory scores, sensory levels, motor levels, neurological level of injury, SCI severity and AIS) were reviewed to evaluate the effect of injury factors and clinician grade on the completion and accuracy of the ISNCSCI components.
resultsThe ISNCSCI chart was used 1.9 times on average during admission. The number of ISNCSCI assessments was significant in those with isolated spinal injuries (p = 0.03). The overall completion and accuracy rates of the assessed ISNCSCI chart components were 39% and 78.1%, respectively. Motor levels and AIS had the lowest completion rates. Motor levels and sensory levels had the lowest accuracy rates. The completion rate was higher in the charts of male patients, tetraplegic patients, and in patients with isolated spinal injuries. The junior clinicians had a significantly greater ISNCSCI chart completion rate than their seniors. However, the senior clinicians were more accurate in completing the ISNCSCI chart components.
conclusionThe quality of ISNCSCI documentation remained poor regardless of the clinician training grade and injury factors. Clinicians should be educated on the ISNCSCI protocol and the importance of adequate documentation.
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.