ArticleSpinal cord2025
Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the Spinal Cord Independence Measure (SCIM III) self-report.
Article in Spinal cord, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designA cross-sectional validation study.
objectivesThe aim of the study was to create a Turkish version of the Spinal Cord Independence Measure Self-Report (SCIM-SR) scale and verify its validity and reliability.
settingRehabilitation Department at Istanbul Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation and Training Research Hospital.
methodsThe Turkish version of SCIM-SR was translated from English using forward and backward translation in accordance with standard guidelines and 90 participants completed the SCIM-SR Turkish form. At the same time, a Spinal Cord Independence Measure III (SCIM III) was administered to the participants by a health professional through observation. Cronbach's alpha, Pearson and Spearman correlation coefficients were used to evaluate the internal consistency and concurrent validity.
resultsThe Cronbach's α coefficients for the total scale was 0.883. For the subscales, it was 0.929 for self-care, 0.571 for respiration and sphincter management and 0.885 for mobility. Test-retest reliability after two weeks yielded Spearman coefficients above 0.92 for the total scale and all subscales. When analyzing the correlation between SCIM-SR and SCIM III, the intraclass correlation average and its lower and upper bound values were as follows: 0.984 (0.976-0.990) for self-care; 0.970 (0.955-0.980) for respiration and sphincter management; 0.968 (0.951-0.979) for mobility and 0.980 (0.969-0.987) for the total. There was good agreement between SCIM-SR and SCIM III when evaluating the total score in Bland-Altman graphs. The Bland-Altman analysis revealed no significant proportional bias (0.76; 95% CI [-21.34, 22.87]), but a significant fixed bias was observed.
conclusionsThe Turkish version of SCIM-SR demonstrated excellent internal consistency and good validity in Turkish individuals with spinal cord injury.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40000837What 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.