ArticleSpinal cord series and cases2022
Quantitative electrophysiological assessments as predictive markers of lower limb motor recovery after spinal cord injury: a pilot study with an adaptive trial design.
Article in Spinal cord series and cases, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development and validation of the electrosacrogram (ESG): a digital point-of-care tool for real-time neuro-sacral assessment after spinal cord injury.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- The Soleus H-Reflex as a Biomarker of Post-Injury Spasticity in Spinal Cord Injury: A Conceptual Pilot Study.NeuroRehabilitation · 2025Article
- Predicting motor recovery in tetraplegia during inpatient rehabilitation by motor unit action potentials and stimulated manual motor testing.The journal of spinal cord medicine · 2025Article
- Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for enhancing motor function after spinal cord injury: a narrative review.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Review
- Utility of transcranial magnetic stimulation in the assessment of spinal cord injury: Current status and future directions.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2022Review
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designObservational, cohort study.
objectives(1) Determine the feasibility and relevance of assessing corticospinal, sensory, and spinal pathways early after traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) in a rehabilitation setting. (2) Validate whether electrophysiological and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) measures taken early after SCI could identify preserved neural pathways, which could then guide therapy.
settingIntensive functional rehabilitation hospital (IFR).
methodsFive individuals with traumatic SCI and eight controls were recruited. The lower extremity motor score (LEMS), electrical perceptual threshold (EPT) at the S2 dermatome, soleus (SOL) H-reflex, and motor evoked potentials (MEPs) in the tibialis anterior (TA) muscle were assessed during the stay in IFR and in the chronic stage (>6 months post-SCI). Control participants were only assessed once. Feasibility criteria included the absence of adverse events, adequate experimental session duration, and complete dataset gathering. The relationship between electrophysiological data collected in IFR and LEMS in the chronic phase was studied. The admission MRI was used to calculate the maximal spinal cord compression (MSCC).
resultsNo adverse events occurred, but a complete dataset could not be collected for all subjects due to set-up configuration limitations and time constraints. EPT measured at IFR correlated with LEMS in the chronic phases (r = -0.67), whereas SOL H/M ratio, H latency, MEPs and MSCC did not.
conclusionsAdjustments are necessary to implement electrophysiological assessments in an IFR setting. Combining MRI and electrophysiological measures may lead to better assessment of neuronal deficits early after SCI.
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.