ArticleSpinal cord2024
Cognitive assessment during inpatient rehabilitation after spinal cord injury, a retrospective cross-sectional study.
Article in Spinal cord, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Prevalence and psychosocial interventions of mental disorders following traumatic spinal cord injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on knowledge graphs.BMC psychiatry · 2026Pooled it
- Microglial TREM2 and cognitive impairment: insights from Alzheimer's disease with implications for spinal cord injury and AI-assisted therapeutics.Frontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2025Review
- Association of spinal cord structure with cognition in hereditary spastic paraplegia type 5.Frontiers in neurology · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designCross-sectional study.
objectivesCognitive screening is underdeveloped in spinal cord injury (SCI). Therefore, the objectives of our study were: (1) to evaluate cognitive functioning of rehabilitation inpatients with recently acquired spinal cord injury (SCI) with the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA); (2) to analyse associations between patient and lesion characteristics and the MoCA scores and (3) to compare the MoCA with the cognitive domain of the Utrecht scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation (USER).
settingInpatient rehabilitation in a specialized rehabilitation centre in the Netherlands.
methodsMOCA and USER data of inpatients between November 2020 and December 2021 were used. Correlation and regression analysis were used.
resultsIncluded were 98 adults aged (median) 61.6 years (range 19.5-83.6), 66% male, 26.5% traumatic SCI, 63% persons with paraplegia. MoCA and USER scores were available for 83 and 92 individuals, respectively. In 44.6% of the participants, the MoCA score was below the cut-off. Age (r = 0.31, p = 0.005) and educational level (r = 0.54 P < 0.00) were significantly correlated to the MoCA score. The MoCA and the cognitive domain of the USER were moderately correlated (r = 0.25, p = 0.03).
conclusionsAlmost half of the inpatients scored below the cut-off score on the MoCA. Since the MoCA is a validated cognitive screening tool, the moderate correlation of the MoCA and the cognitive domain of the USER suggests that the USER alone is not sufficient in detecting cognitive deficits. We recommend to screen for cognitive deficits in all people with new SCI. SPONSORSHIP: None.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39289596What 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.