ReviewSpinal cord2023
Computer International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury (ISNCSCI) algorithms: a review.
Review in Spinal cord, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Severity Prediction of Traumatic Cervical Spinal Cord Injury With an AI Model Based on MRI Radiomics.JOR spine · 2026Article
- Treatment and prognosis of spinal cord reperfusion injury after cervical spinal canal stenosis surgery: a case report.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury: Classification Questions and Cases.Topics in spinal cord injury rehabilitation · 2025Article
- An Evaluation of International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury (ISNCSCI) Performance Within the Canadian SCI Network.Topics in spinal cord injury rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Development and Validation of an Algorithm for Item Reduction of the International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury Examination to Determine Level and Severity of SCI.Topics in spinal cord injury rehabilitation · 2025Article
- From severity scoring to predictive analytics: the emerging role of AI in neurosurgery.Frontiers in neurologyReview
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
designLiterature review and survey.
objectivesTo provide an overview of existing computerized International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury (ISNCSCI) algorithms and to evaluate the use of the current algorithms in research and clinical care.
settingNot applicable.
methodsLiterature review according to three organizing concepts for evaluation of Health Information Products (reach, usefulness, and use) was conducted.
resultsWhile the use of computerized ISNCSCI algorithms has been around for many years, many were developed and used internally for specific projects or not maintained. Today the International SCI community has free access to algorithms from the European Multicenter Study about Spinal Cord Injury (EMSCI) and the Praxis Spinal Cord Institute. Both algorithms have been validated in large datasets and are used in different SCI registries for quality control and education purposes. The use of the Praxis Institute algorithm by clinicians was highlighted through the Praxis User Survey (n = 76) which included participants from 27 countries. The survey found that over half of the participants using the algorithm (N = 69) did so on a regular basis (51%), with 54% having incorporated it into their regular workflow.
conclusionsValidated computerized ISNCSCI classification tools have evolved substantially and support education, clinical documentation, communication between clinicians and their patients, and ISNCSCI data quality around the world. They are not intended to replace well-trained clinicians, but allow for reclassification of ISNCSCI datasets with updated versions of the ISCNSCI, and support rapid classification of large datasets.
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.