ArticleSpinal cord2023
Interrater reliability of the Standing and Walking Assessment Tool for spinal cord injury.
Article in Spinal cord, 2023. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Factors Affecting Standing and Walking Outcomes for Individuals With Spinal Cord Injury During In-Patient Rehabilitation: A Qualitative Study on the Perspectives of Physiotherapists.Physiotherapy Canada. Physiotherapie Canada · 2025Article
- Communicating Standing and Walking Data after Spinal Cord Injury: A Patient-Engaged, Qualitative Study.Topics in spinal cord injury rehabilitation · 2023Article
- Convergent validity and responsiveness of The Standing and Walking Assessment Tool (SWAT) among individuals with non-traumatic spinal cord injury.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Article
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 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designPsychometric study.
objectivesThe Standing and Walking Assessment Tool (SWAT) is a standardized approach to the evaluation of standing and walking capacity following traumatic spinal cord injury (tSCI) in Canada. The SWAT classifies individuals with a tSCI into 12 stages of standing and walking capacity that are paired with well-established outcome measures, such as the Berg Balance Scale and 10-m Walk Test. Prior research has demonstrated the validity and responsiveness of the SWAT stages; however, the reliability remains unknown. The objective of this study was to evaluate the interrater reliability of the SWAT stages.
settingInpatient units of two Canadian rehabilitation hospitals.
methodsAdults with sub-acute tSCI were recruited. SWAT stage was evaluated for each participant by two physical therapists separately. The two therapists aimed to complete the evaluations within one day of each other. To evaluate interrater reliability, the percentage agreement between the SWAT stages rated by the two physical therapists was calculated, along with a linear weighted kappa statistic with a 95% CI.
resultsForty-five individuals with sub-acute tSCI (36 males, 9 females, mean (SD) age of 54.8 (17.9) years) participated. The percentage agreement in SWAT stages between the two physical therapists was 75.6%. A kappa statistic of 0.93 with a 95% CI, 0.81-1.05 was obtained. In cases where therapists disagreed (18% of participants), therapists differed by 1-2 stages only.
conclusionsThe SWAT stages have high interrater reliability, providing further support for the use of the SWAT in rehabilitation practice in Canada.
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.