ArticleThe journal of spinal cord medicine2021
Evaluation of the quality of published SCI clinical practice guidelines using the AGREE II instrument: Results from Can-SCIP expert panel.
Article in The journal of spinal cord medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ketogenic diet therapy for children with super-refractory status epilepticus in intensive care: International clinical practice recommendations.Epilepsia open · 2026Review
- Development of the Canadian Spinal Cord Injury Best Practice (Can-SCIP) Guideline: Methods and overview.The journal of spinal cord medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSpinal cord injury (SCI) is a complex condition with substantial adverse personal, social and economic impacts necessitating evidence-based inter-professional care. To date, limited studies have assessed the quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) within SCI. The aim of this study is to evaluate the quality of the development process and methodological rigour of published SCI CPGs across the care continuum from pre-hospital to community-based care.
methodsElectronic health databases and indexes were searched to identify English or French language CPGs within SCI published within the last nine years with specific evidence-based recommendations applicable to the Canadian health care setting. Eligible CPGs were evaluated using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument.
resultsA total of forty-one CPGs that met the inclusion criteria were appraised by at least four raters. There was high variability in quality. Twenty-seven CPGs achieved a good rigour of development domain score of >70%. Other standardized mean domain scores were scope and purpose (85.32%), stakeholder involvement (65.03%), clarity of presentation (84.81%), applicability (55.55%) and editorial independence (75.83%). The agreement between appraisers (intraclass correlation coefficient) was high (intraclass correlation coefficient > 0.80).
conclusionThere is a paucity of CPGs that address community-based specialized rehabilitation and community reintegration. Furthermore, many CPGs only focus on a single impairment at one time point in the care continuum. As SCI is a complex condition that results in multimorbidity and requires health monitoring and intervention across the lifespan, a rigorously developed CPG that addresses high-quality, interprofessional comprehensive care is needed.
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.