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.
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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review of predictive models for hospital-acquired pressure injury using machine learning.Nursing open · 2023Pooled it
- Risk prediction tools for pressure injury occurrence: an umbrella review of systematic reviews reporting model development and validation methods.Diagnostic and prognostic research · 2025Review
- Implementable Prediction of Pressure Injuries in Hospitalized Adults: Model Development and Validation.JMIR medical informatics · 2024Article
- Incidence of cervical collar-related pressure injury in patients with head and neck trauma: A scoping review study.Journal of education and health promotion · 2023Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
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
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.