ReviewThe journal of spinal cord medicine2023
Rehabilitation interventions to modify endocrine-metabolic disease risk in individuals with chronic spinal cord injury living in the community (RIISC): A systematic search and review of prospective cohort and case-control studies.
Review in The journal of spinal cord medicine, 2023. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Screening, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Cardiometabolic Risk in Persons With Spinal Cord Injury/Disease: A Scoping Review.Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation · 2025Review
- Taking risk to heart: An evaluation of cardiometabolic risk and screening guideline adherence in outpatients with spinal cord injury.The journal of spinal cord medicine · 2025Article
- Potential Effects of an Exoskeleton-Assisted Overground Walking Program for Individuals With Spinal Cord Injury Who Uses a Wheelchair on Imaging and Serum Markers of Bone Strength: Pre-Post Study.JMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies · 2024Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
contextEndocrine-metabolic disease (EMD) is associated with functional disability, social isolation, hospitalization and even death in individuals living with a chronic spinal cord injury (SCI). There is currently very low-quality evidence that rehabilitation interventions can reduce EMD risk during chronic SCI. Non-randomized trials and alternative study designs are excluded from traditional knowledge synthesis.
objectiveTo characterize evidence from level 3-4 studies evaluating rehabilitation interventions for their effectiveness to improve EMD risk in community-dwelling adults with chronic SCI.
methodsSystematic searches of MEDLINE PubMed, EMBASE Ovid, CINAHL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and PsychInfo were completed. All longitudinal trials, prospective cohort, case-control studies, and case series evaluating the effectiveness of rehabilitation/therapeutic interventions to modify/associate with EMD outcomes in adults with chronic SCI were eligible. Two authors independently selected studies and abstracted data. Mean changes from baseline were reported for EMD outcomes. The Downs and Black Checklist was used to rate evidence quality.
resultsOf 489 articles identified, 44 articles (
conclusionLongitudinal multicentre pragmatic studies involving longer-term exercise and dietary intervention and follow-up periods are needed to fully understand the impact of these rehabilitation approaches to mitigate EMD risk. Our broad evaluation of prospective cohort and case-control studies provides new perspectives on alternative study designs, a multi-impairment paradigm approach of studying EMD outcomes, and knowledge gaps related to SCI rehabilitation.
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.