Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33353467›Full record

ReviewJournal of neurotrauma2021

Meeting Proceedings for SCI 2020: Launching a Decade of Disruption in Spinal Cord Injury Research.

Leslie R Morse, Edelle C Field-Fote, Jose Contreras-Vidal, Linda J Noble-Haeusslein, Matthew Rodreick, Richard K Shields, Michael Sofroniew, Robert Wudlick, Jeanne M Zanca, SCI 2020 Working Group

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of neurotrauma, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Including People with Spinal Cord Injury in Research as Participants, Partners, and Personnel.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Molecular approaches for spinal cord injury treatment.Neural regeneration research · 2023
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

10 authors.

Leslie R MorseDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Minnesota School of Medicine, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.
Edelle C Field-FoteShepherd Center, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Jose Contreras-VidalLaboratory for Non-Invasive Brain Machine Interfaces, NSF IUCRC BRAIN, Cullen College of Engineering, University of Houston, Houston, Texas, USA.
Linda J Noble-HaeussleinDepartments of Neurology and Psychology and the Institute of Neuroscience, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, USA.
Matthew RodreickUnite 2 Fight Paralysis, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.
Richard K ShieldsDepartment of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation Science, Roy J. and Lucille A. Carver College of Medicine, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, USA.
Michael SofroniewDepartment of Neurobiology, University of California, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Robert WudlickDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Minnesota School of Medicine, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.
Jeanne M ZancaSpinal Cord Injury Research, Kessler Foundation, West Orange, New Jersey, USA.
SCI 2020 Working Group

Funding

Natural History of Shoulder Pathology in Wheelchair UsersR01HD084423 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MED BR GALVESTON · PI MELISSA M. MORROW · 2015 to 2026
$4.7M
Mobile and Remote Monitoring of Seating Pressure for Wheelchair Users with SCIR21AG050640 · NIA · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI MORROW, MELISSA M., VOS-DRAPER, TAMARA · 2015 to 2016
$432k
NIA NIH HHS R21 AG050640NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD084423
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The spinal cord injury (SCI) research community has experienced great advances in discovery research, technology development, and promising clinical interventions in the past decade. To build upon these advances and maximize the benefit to persons with SCI, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) hosted a conference February 12-13, 2019 titled "SCI 2020: Launching a Decade of Disruption in Spinal Cord Injury Research." The purpose of the conference was to bring together a broad range of stakeholders, including researchers, clinicians and healthcare professionals, persons with SCI, industry partners, regulators, and funding agency representatives to break down existing communication silos. Invited speakers were asked to summarize the state of the science, assess areas of technological and community readiness, and build collaborations that could change the trajectory of research and clinical options for people with SCI. In this report, we summarize the state of the science in each of five key domains and identify the gaps in the scientific literature that need to be addressed to move the field forward.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchCongresses as TopicExoskeleton DeviceHumansMarylandNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (U.S.)Spinal Cord InjuriesTranscutaneous Electric Nerve StimulationUnited Statesassistive technologyneural plasticityneural regenerationneuromodulationrehabilitation medicinespinal cord injury

Identifiers

PMID33353467
PMCPMC11984770

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.