Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32694750›Full record

ArticleSpinal cord2021

Development of the spinal cord injury pressure sore onset risk screening (SCI-PreSORS) instrument: a pressure injury risk decision tree for spinal cord injury rehabilitation.

Jude J Delparte, Heather M Flett, Carol Y Scovil, Anthony S Burns

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Spinal cord, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jude J DelparteNeural Engineering and Therapeutics Team, KITE (Knowledge Innovation Talent Everywhere), University Health Network - Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Heather M FlettBrain and Spinal Cord Rehabilitation Program, University Health Network - Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Carol Y ScovilBrain and Spinal Cord Rehabilitation Program, University Health Network - Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Anthony S BurnsNeural Engineering and Therapeutics Team, KITE (Knowledge Innovation Talent Everywhere), University Health Network - Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada. anthony.burns@uhn.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8679-3958
University Health Network · CA

Funding

Ontario Neurotrauma Foundation (ONF) 2010-RHI-ONF-BPI-832Rick Hansen Institute (Institut Rick Hansen) 2015-RHI-BPI-996
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

STUDY

designPsychometric study based on retrospectively collected data.

objectiveDevelopment of a pressure injury (PI) risk screening instrument for use during spinal cord injury (SCI) rehabilitation.

settingTertiary rehabilitation center.

methodsMedical charts of 807 inpatients participating in SCI rehabilitation were reviewed. Two models (recursive partitioning and logistic regression) were developed with demographic and Functional Independence Measure (FIM) variables and compared with the SCI Pressure Ulcer Scale (SCIPUS, n = 603) and Braden scale (n = 100) using modeling (n = 615) and validation (n = 192) datasets. Sensitivity and specificity analyses were completed for each model. Models yielding high sensitivity and area under the curve (AUC), while minimizing false negatives (FN < 0.5%) were preferred.

resultsIn the modeling dataset, a single dichotomized FIM variable, Bed/Chair Transfers <4, was predictive of PI incidence (sensitivity = 97%, AUC = 74%, FN = 0.49%) and had similar metrics as the logistic regression model (sensitivity = 97%, AUC = 76%, FN = 0.49%). The recursive partitioning model had fewer FN (sensitivity = 98%, AUC = 75%, FN = 0.33%). When applied to the validation dataset, both models performed similarly. The SCIPUS performed poorly (AUC < 70%). When analyses were limited to cases with available Braden data and no admission PI, recursive partitioning outperformed the other methods for PI risk screening.

conclusionA recursive partitioning model, named the SCI-PreSORS (SCI Pressure Sore Onset Risk Screening), demonstrated promise for PI risk screening during inpatient SCI rehabilitation. Prospective validation of the new model is warranted.

Indexed as

Neurological RehabilitationPressure UlcerSpinal Cord InjuriesDecision TreesHumansRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID32694750
OpenAlexW3044456077

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.