ArticleBMJ open sport & exercise medicine2023
Dissonance in views between healthcare professionals and adults with a spinal cord injury with their understanding and interpretation of exercise intensity for exercise prescription.
Article in BMJ open sport & exercise medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of high-intensity exercise training on functional recovery after spinal cord injury.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 6 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To evaluate the difference between healthcare professionals (HCPs) and adults with spinal cord injury (SCI) in Asia regarding knowledge and interpretation of 'exercise intensity' for aerobic exercise prescription. Methods and study design: A survey was distributed to practising HCP and adults with SCI. It was completed in participants' local language on topics related to the importance of exercise frequency, intensity, time and type; methods for monitoring and terms related to exercise intensity prescription. χ Results: 121 HCP and 107 adults with an SCI ≥1 years (C1-L4) participated. Responses revealed 61% of all HCP ranked 'intensity' being most important whereas only 38% respondents from the SCI group ranked it as high importance (p=0.008). For those with SCI, 'frequency' was most important (61%) which was significantly higher than the 45% selected by HCPs (p=0.030). Of the 228 respondents on average only 34% believed that the terms, 'moderate' and 'vigorous' provided enough information for aerobic exercise intensity prescription. HCP most often used HR methods compared with the SCI group (90% vs 54%; p<0.01). Both groups frequently used the subjective measures of exercise intensity, for example, Ratings of Perceived Exertion (8%3 vs 76% for HCP and SCI), HCP also frequently used speed (81%) and SCI also frequently relied on 'the affect' or feelings while exercising (69%). Conclusions: These differences must be considered when developing clinical-practice exercise guidelines and health referral educational pathways for adults with SCI in Asia.
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.