ArticleThe journal of spinal cord medicine2026
End user evaluation of the Canadian Spinal Cord Injury Physical Activity Guidelines: Barriers and facilitators to uptake and dissemination in the United States.
Article in The journal of spinal cord medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
objectiveTo engage U.S. end users to (1) gather information on facilitators and barriers to awareness and adoption of the Canadian Spinal Cord Injury (SCI) Physical Activity (PA) guidelines; (2) inform potential adaptations to the presentation and messaging of the guidelines; and (3) develop recommendations for targeted dissemination strategies to promote awareness in the United States.
designMulti-method.
settingWorking groups conducted remotely via Zoom and online surveys.
participantsIndividuals with lived SCI experience (
interventionsN/A. OUTCOME MEASURES: N/A.
resultsParticipants highlighted the need for centralised, credible sources of information on PA. While participants generally viewed the guidelines as appropriate, useable, and acceptable, some questioned their credibility, as they were developed explicitly for Canadians with SCI rather than Americans. To enhance reach and effectiveness, participants suggested dissemination strategies that target specific audiences (i.e. level of functioning, level of injury, current level of PA). They also recommended collaborations with existing trusted community SCI organisations.
conclusionFindings underscore the need for accessible, centralised, and credible information sources on PA tailored to the needs of the SCI community. Findings also suggest that while the guidelines do not require redevelopment for a U.S. context, they do need customised presentation, such as removing Canadian symbols from the materials, to better suit U.S. audiences. Effective dissemination will benefit from targeted strategies that leverage trusted organisations to reach and engage specific groups, ultimately supporting greater guideline awareness, acceptance, and application across the SCI population.
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.