ArticleScientific reports2021
Evaluating patient perspectives on participating in scientific research and clinical trials for the treatment of spinal cord injury.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Article
- Priorities and opportunities for advocacy in SCI: An international web-based review.The journal of spinal cord medicine · 2025Review
- Article
- Bridging the gap: a translational perspective in spinal cord injury.Experimental biology and medicine (Maywood, N.J.) · 2024Review
- Porcine Model of the Growing Spinal Cord-Changes in Diffusion Tensor Imaging Parameters.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Article
- Surveying people with spinal cord injuries in Brazil to ascertain research priorities.Scientific reports · 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
11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A questionnaire was developed to evaluate patients' perspective on research aimed at improving functions and overcoming complications associated with spinal cord injury (SCI). The first three sections were based on published and validated assessment tools. The final section was developed to assess participant perspectives on research for SCI. One thousand patients were approached, of which 159 participated. Fifty-eight percent of participants were satisfied with their 'life as a whole'. Two factors could be generated that reflected the variance in the data regarding participants' life with a SCI: "Psychosocial and physical wellbeing" and "Independent living". The majority of participants stated they would be involved in research (86%) or clinical trials (77%). However, the likelihood of participation dropped when potential risks of the research/trials were explained. Which participants would be willing to participate in research could not be predicted based on the severity of their injury, their psychosocial and physical wellbeing or their independent living. Despite participant establishment of a life with SCI, our data indicates that individuals strive for improvements in function. Participant willingness to be included in research studies is noteworthy and scientists and clinicians are encouraged to involve more patients in all aspects of their research.
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.