ArticleSpinal cord2021
Developing a consensus on the core educational content to be acquired by people with spinal cord injuries during rehabilitation: findings from a Delphi study followed by a Consensus Conference.
Article in Spinal cord, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The technical expert/clinical user/patient panel (TECUPP): centering patient and family perspectives in patient-reported measure development.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designThree-round Delphi study followed by a Consensus Conference with selected stakeholders.
objectivesTo identify a set of core educational content that people with spinal cord injury (SCI) need to acquire during rehabilitation.
settingThe Delphi study was performed electronically. The Consensus Conference was held at the Città della Salute e della Scienza University Hospital of Turin, Italy.
methodsA panel of 20 experts (healthcare professionals and SCI survivors) participated in a three-round Delphi study. In round 1, arguments for core educational content were solicited and reduced into items. In rounds 2 and 3, a five-point Likert scale was used to find consensus on and validate core educational content items (threshold for consensus and agreement: 60% and 80%, respectively). A Consensus Conference involving 32 stakeholders was held to discuss, modify (if appropriate) and approve the list of validated items.
resultsThe 171 arguments proposed in round 1 were reduced into 74 items; 67 were validated in round 3. The Consensus Conference approved a final list of 72 core educational content items, covering 16 categories, which were made into a checklist.
conclusionsConsensus was achieved for a set of core educational content for people with SCI. The resultant checklist could serve as an assessment tool for both healthcare professionals and SCI survivors. It can also be used to support SCI survivors' education, streamline resource use and bridge the gap between information provided during rehabilitation and information SCI survivors need to function in the community.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34108615What 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.