ArticleThe journal of spinal cord medicine2025
Responsiveness and minimal clinically important differences of the Trunk Assessment Scale for Spinal Cord injury (TASS).
Article in The journal of spinal cord medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Structural validity of the Trunk Assessment Scale for Spinal Cord Injury (TASS) with Rasch analysis for individuals with spinal cord disorders.The journal of spinal cord medicine · 2025Article
- Using the benefit-harm trade-off method to determine the smallest worthwhile effect of intensive motor training on strength for people with spinal cord injury.Spinal cord · 2024Article
- Synergistic integration of epidural spinal cord stimulation with robotic therapy and neurorehabilitation to facilitate functional recovery in chronic sensorimotor complete spinal cord injury: A case series.Advances in rehabilitation science and practiceArticle
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo confirm the responsiveness and minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) of the Trunk Assessment Scale for Spinal Cord Injury (TASS). PARTICIPANTS AND
methodsWe evaluated 48 Japanese individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI) (age 64.1 ± 10.4 yrs, 28 with tetraplegia) admitted to two institutions at admission, at 1 month of hospitalization, and at discharge with the TASS, the Trunk Control Test in individuals with an SCI (TCT-SCI) motor score, the Functional Independence Measure motor score (mFIM), and the Global Rating of Change Scale (GRCS). We assessed the TASS responsiveness by determining the correlation coefficients for the changes in the TASS' and other assessments' scores. We calculated the MCIDs by five anchor-based methods.
resultsThe changes in the TASS and those in the other assessments were weakly correlated at 1 month and moderately correlated at discharge. The TASS MCIDs were observed at 1 month and at discharge.
conclusionOur findings confirmed that the change in TASS scores had weak-to-moderate correlations with the changes in the participants' upper- and lower-limb function and activities of daily living. Using the MCID for the TASS determined by anchor-based methods may lead to a better interpretation of changes in the trunk function of individuals with SCIs.
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.