ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2021
Validation of the Monitoring Efficacy of Neurogenic Bowel Treatment on Response (MENTOR) Tool in a Japanese Rehabilitation Setting.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
STUDY
designProspective observational study.
objectiveTo validate the Monitoring Efficacy of NBD Treatment On Response (MENTOR) tool in individuals with a spinal cord injury (SCI) or spina bifida, suffering from neurogenic bowel dysfunction (NBD) in a rehabilitation center in Japan.
methodsFirst, the MENTOR tool was translated from English to Japanese using a validated translation process. Second, the MENTOR tool was validated in a rehabilitation clinic in Japan. Participants completed the MENTOR tool prior to a consultation with an expert physician. According to the results of the tool, each participant was allocated to one of three categories regarding change in treatment: "adequately treated," "further discussion," and "recommended change." The results of the MENTOR tool were compared with the treatment decision made by an expert physician, who was blinded to the results of the MENTOR tool.
resultsA total of 60 participants completed the MENTOR tool. There was an acceptable concordance between individuals allocated as respectively, being adequately treated (100%) and recommended change in treatment (61%) and the physicians' decision on treatment. The concordance was lower for individuals allocated as requiring further discussion (48%).
conclusionsIn this study the MENTOR tool was successfully validated in a Japanese rehab setting. The tool will help identify individuals with SCI that need further treatment of their NBD symptoms.
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.