Observational studySpinal cord2024
Effects of wheelchair skills training during peer-led Active Rehabilitation Camps for people with spinal cord injury in Poland: a cohort study.
Observational study in Spinal cord, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Manual wheelchair training for individuals with chronic and progressive conditions: a critical realist approach to improving practice.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Health Priorities and Participation in Peer-Led Active Rehabilitation Camps Among Persons with Spinal Cord Injury: A Prospective Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- "I moved from simply being to actively living." A qualitative study on peer mentorship camps for adults with acquired brain injury.International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being · 2025Article
- Article
- The Experience of Manual Wheelchair Training for People With Chronic and Progressive Conditions: Perspectives of Users and Trainers.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designProspective cohort study.
objectivesTo evaluate the effects of wheelchair skills training (WSTR) for participants with spinal cord injury (SCI) during peer-led Active Rehabilitation Camps (ARC) in Poland. We hypothesized that participation in ARC will improve wheelchair skill performance and self-efficacy in individuals with SCI. We also aimed to determine demographic and injury-related factors associated with greater improvements in wheelchair skill performance and self-efficacy.
settingThirteen consecutive ARCs in Poland.
methodsParticipants (n = 122) with traumatic or nontraumatic SCI older than 16 years were evaluated at the beginning (T1) and completion (T2) of ARC and at 3-month follow-up (T3) through the Queensland Evaluation of Wheelchair Skills (QEWS) and the Wheelchair Skills Test Questionnaire (WST-Q).
resultsAt T2, 43% of participants reached the threshold for substantial clinically meaningful change in QEWS, 73% in WST-Q capacity, and 67% in confidence, with approximately half of those reporting such gains at T3. At a group level, participants achieved small effect-size improvements (QEWS) at T2; large effects in wheelchair skills capacity at T2 and T3; large effects in wheelchair skill confidence at T2, and low effects at T3. Prior attendance to ARC was the only independent variable that explained 10% of variance in wheelchair capacity gains.
conclusionsPeer-led WSTR during ARCs is highly effective at improving wheelchair skills in individuals with SCI. These improvements are largely retained after three months. Persons with SCI should have a chance to participate in more than one camp to maintain and further improve their wheelchair skills.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39261595What 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.