ArticleArchives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation2020
The Value in Mental Health Screening for Individuals With Spinal Cord Injury: What Patients Tell Us.
Article in Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Regulation of Nrf2/GPX4 Signaling Pathway by Hyperbaric Oxygen Protects Against Depressive Behavior and Cognitive Impairment in a Spinal Cord Injury Rat Model.CNS neuroscience & therapeutics · 2025Article
- Characterizing Concerns and Stressors During Subacute Spinal Cord Injury: A Thematic Analysis of Psychotherapy Session Notes.Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation · 2025Article
- The Association Between Spirituality, Self-Esteem, Anxiety and Depression: A Comparative Exploratory Study Between People with a Spinal Cord Injury and Healthy Subjects in Greece.Journal of religion and health · 2024Article
- Social disconnectedness and perceived social isolation in persons with spinal cord injury/dysfunction living in the community: A scoping review.The journal of spinal cord medicine · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo gather consumer perspectives of a mental health screening protocol and to identify the incidence of previously unrecognized mental health concerns (case finding).
designPilot study using mixed methods: quantitative (survey) and qualitative (interviews).
settingPrimary care health team in Kitchener, Ontario, Canada.
participantsPatients (N=15) with spinal cord injury living in the community. Participants ranged in age from 21 to 81 years of age (mean=46); 12 were men, 8 had tetraplegia and 5 paraplegia. The number of years since injury ranged from 1 to 32 (mean=13).
interventionImplementation of a mental health screening protocol consisting of standardized screening tools for depression, anxiety, substance abuse, social isolation, somatoform disorder, functional status, chronic pain, and cognitive impairment.
main outcome measuresPositive results on screening tool, acceptability of the screening process, perceptions of the value of screening, and intentions to follow resulting treatment recommendations.
resultsScreening identified 11 of 15 individuals with a chronic pain condition; 1 individual screened positive for depression, 1 for anxiety, 3 for potential substance abuse, and 1 for social isolation. Most of the participants (12/13) rated the screening protocol as
conclusionsScreening tools alone may not identify mental health issues. Interviews in addition to screening tools are needed to accurately identify mental health issues in this population. Identification of mental health issues is critical to ensuring access to effective interventions and improving health outcomes and quality of life for individuals with SCI.
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.