Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31595042›Full record

Observational studySpinal cord2020

The influence of neurological examination timing within hours after acute traumatic spinal cord injuries: an observational study.

Nathan Evaniew, Babak Sharifi, Zeina Waheed, Nader Fallah, Tamir Ailon, Nicolas Dea, Scott Paquette, Raphaele Charest-Morin, John Street, Charles G Fisher and 4 more

Erratum issuedAbstract readObservational Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in Spinal cord, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Nathan EvaniewDivision of Spine, University of British Columbia, 6400-818 West 10th Avenue, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 1M9, Canada.
Babak SharifiDivision of Spine, University of British Columbia, 6400-818 West 10th Avenue, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 1M9, Canada.
Zeina WaheedRick Hansen Institute, 6400-818 West 10th Avenue, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 1M9, Canada.
Nader FallahRick Hansen Institute, 6400-818 West 10th Avenue, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 1M9, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7746-4773
Tamir AilonDivision of Spine, University of British Columbia, 6400-818 West 10th Avenue, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 1M9, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1966-5323
Nicolas DeaDivision of Spine, University of British Columbia, 6400-818 West 10th Avenue, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 1M9, Canada.
Scott PaquetteDivision of Spine, University of British Columbia, 6400-818 West 10th Avenue, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 1M9, Canada.
Raphaele Charest-MorinDivision of Spine, University of British Columbia, 6400-818 West 10th Avenue, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 1M9, Canada.
John StreetDivision of Spine, University of British Columbia, 6400-818 West 10th Avenue, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 1M9, Canada.
Charles G FisherDivision of Spine, University of British Columbia, 6400-818 West 10th Avenue, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 1M9, Canada.
Marcel F DvorakDivision of Spine, University of British Columbia, 6400-818 West 10th Avenue, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 1M9, Canada.
Vanessa K NoonanRick Hansen Institute, 6400-818 West 10th Avenue, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 1M9, Canada.
Carly S RiversRick Hansen Institute, 6400-818 West 10th Avenue, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 1M9, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4967-2687
Brian K KwonDivision of Spine, University of British Columbia, 6400-818 West 10th Avenue, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 1M9, Canada. brian.kwon@ubc.ca.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

STUDY

designCohort study.

objectivesIt is widely accepted that the prediction of long-term neurologic outcome after traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) can be done more accurately with neurological examinations conducted days to weeks post injury. However, modern clinical trials of neuroprotective interventions often require patients be examined and enrolled within hours. Our objective was to determine whether variability in timing of neurological examinations within 48 h after SCI is associated with differences in observations of follow-up neurologic recovery.

settingLevel I trauma hospital.

methodsAn observational analysis testing for differences in AIS conversion rates and changes in total motor scores by neurological examination timing, controlling for potential confounders with multivariate stepwise regression.

resultsWe included 85 patients, whose mean times from injury to baseline and follow-up examinations were 11.8 h (SD 9.8) and 208.2 days (SD 75.2), respectively. AIS conversion by 1+ grade was significantly more likely in patients examined at ≤4 h in comparison with later examination (78% versus 47%, RR = 1.66, p = 0.04), even after controlling for timing of surgery, age, and sex (OR 5.0, 95% CI 1.1-10, p = 0.04). We failed to identify any statistically significant associations for total motor score recovery in unadjusted or adjusted analyses.

conclusionsAIS grade conversion was significantly more likely in those examined ≤4 h of injury; the effect of timing on motor scores remains uncertain. Variability in neurological examination timing within hours after acute traumatic SCI may influence observations of long-term neurological recovery, which could introduce bias or lead to errors in interpretation of studies of therapeutic interventions.

Indexed as

Outcome and Process Assessment, Health CareTrauma Severity IndicesAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeurologic ExaminationPrognosisProspective StudiesRetrospective StudiesSpinal Cord InjuriesTime Factors

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.