ArticleThe journal of spinal cord medicine2025
Benefits and barriers to return to education and relationship to quality of life for people living with spinal cord injury: Results of a mixed methods study.
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 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Real-world participation after spinal cord injury: longitudinal associations with return to work and long-term social integration.European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextThere is limited research on return to education (RTE) after spinal cord injury (SCI). As a result, few programs exist to help people achieve this goal.
objectiveThe primary objective was to investigate the barriers and facilitators to RTE, and the relationship between RTE and quality of life (QOL). The secondary objective was to examine the role of a Vocational Resource Facilitation (VRF) program on RTE.
methodsA mixed methods approach with a semi-structured interview and online survey was used. Participants included 15 people with SCI with RTE goals who received VRF services at an acute inpatient rehabilitation hospital. Qualitative responses on the barriers, facilitators and perceived benefits of RTE were analyzed using a grounded theory strategy.
resultsBarriers to RTE included physical and mental health, transportation, time, environmental barriers, finances, lack of knowledge about available resources, and discrimination. Facilitators to RTE included the VRF program, social support, financial support, virtual learning, organizational support, and policy constructs. People who RTE after SCI reported better QOL, less depressed mood than those who did not, and were more likely to have returned to work.
conclusionsThis study highlighted common barriers and facilitators to RTE, and potential areas of intervention. VRF is a potentially efficacious early intervention vocational rehabilitation approach that improves participation in education and employment for people with SCI. People who received VRF and achieved RTE may have better QOL outcomes and improved employability.
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.