ArticleThe journal of spinal cord medicine2026
Evaluation and management of autonomic functions in patients with spinal cord injury: A scoping review.
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. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Machine learning-driven prediction of in-hospital cardiac arrest among critically ill patients with traumatic spinal cord injury: a multicenter cohort study.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Autonomic modulation of neuroplasticity in spinal cord injury rehabilitation: insights from a narrative review.Frontiers in neurologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextIndividuals with high-level spinal cord injury (SCI) face serious cardiovascular (CV) autonomic complications, contributing to increased mortality and morbidity. The assessment of CV autonomic function in SCI is challenging and varies widely across studies, with no clear or definitive interventions to restore hemodynamic stability or prevent complications.
objectivesThis review outlines available clinical data on measuring and managing CV autonomic dysfunction after SCI and identifies gaps in these domains.
methodsA scoping review was conducted, using a search strategy targeting broad keywords related to SCI, autonomic function parameters, and management from six relevant databases, as well as reference lists and gray literatures.
resultsOf 2,749 articles identified, 92 were included. Studies categorized CV autonomic complications by acute and chronic stages. High-level SCI was commonly associated with bradycardia, low BP, orthostatic hypotension, and autonomic dysreflexia, compared to lower thoracic SCI. However, the correlation between these complications and SCI completeness was unclear. Various measurement methods were used, including 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM), ECG derivatives, heart rate variability, sympathetic skin response, cold pressor test, head-up tilt, the International Standards to document Autonomic Function following SCI (ISAFSCI) and the Autonomic Dysfunction Following SCI (ADFSCI) tools. Of these, 24-hour ABPM demonstrated superiority in identifying diurnal variation and activity effects on CV conditions. Studies reported mixed outcomes for both pharmacological and non-pharmacological management of CV complications.
conclusionResearch gaps persist, especially in sub-acute stages and in standardized tools for assessing CV autonomic dysfunction. Chronic complications have a long-term impact on health and CV disease risk. While promising methodologies exist, such as 24-hour ABPM and questionnaire-based assessments, further refinement is needed. Comprehensive management strategies should also be developed. This includes emerging techniques like spinal neuromodulation, which require extensive research and clinical trials.
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.