ArticleSpinal cord2022
Differences in sensorimotor and functional recovery between the dominant and non-dominant upper extremity following cervical spinal cord injury.
Article in Spinal cord, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Characterizing neurological status in individuals with tetraplegia using transcutaneous spinal stimulation.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Upper extremity asymmetry due to nerve injuries or central neurologic conditions: a scoping review.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2023Article
- Transcutaneous spinal stimulation provides characterization of neurological status in individuals with tetraplegia.Research square · 2023Article
- Combined Transcutaneous Electrical Spinal Cord Stimulation and Task-Specific Rehabilitation Improves Trunk and Sitting Functions in People with Chronic Tetraplegia.Biomedicines · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designPost hoc analysis of prospective multi-national, multi-centre cohort study.
objectiveDetermine whether cerebral dominance influences upper extremity recovery following cervical spinal cord injury (SCI).
settingA multi-national subset of the longitudinal GRASSP dataset (n = 127).
methodsSecondary analysis of prospective, longitudinal multicenter study of individuals with cervical SCI (n = 73). Study participants were followed for up to 12 months after a cervical SCI, and the following outcome measures were serially assessed - the Graded Redefined Assessment of Strength, Sensibility, and Prehension (GRASSP) and the International Standards for the Neurological Classification of SCI (ISNCSCI), including upper extremity motor and sensory scores. Observed recovery and relative (percent) recovery were then determined for both the GRASSP and ISNCSCI, based on change from initial to last available assessment.
resultsWith the exception of prehension performance (quantitative grasping) following complete cervical SCI, there were no significant differences (p < 0.05) for observed and relative (percent) recovery, between the dominant and non-dominant upper extremities, as measured using GRASSP subtests, ISNCSCI motor scores and ISNCSCI sensory scores.
conclusionDespite well documented differences between the cerebral hemispheres, cerebral dominance appears to play a limited role in upper extremity recovery following acute cervical SCI.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35273373What 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.