ArticleTopics in spinal cord injury rehabilitation2025
Reliability of SCIseg Automated Measurement of Midsagittal Tissue Bridges in Spinal Cord Injuries Using an External Dataset.
Article in Topics in spinal cord injury rehabilitation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Spinal cord lesion characteristics and early standing ability with and without epidural stimulation.Experimental brain research · 2026Article
- Magnetic resonance imaging tissue bridges: An emerging biomarker for prognostication in traumatic spinal cord injury.World journal of orthopedics · 2026Article
- Monitoring morphometric drift in lifelong learning segmentation of the spinal cord.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To determine the interrater reliability between an automated and manual measure of lesion damage following spinal cord injury (SCI) using T2-weighted magnetic resonance images (MRI). Methods: Twenty-one MRIs were collected from patients who had completed rehabilitation at Craig Hospital. Manual measurements of midsagittal tissue bridges were conducted by an experienced rater using OsiriX (Pixmeo Sarl, Geneva, Switzerland), and automated measures were taken using the SCIsegV2 automated function through the Spinal Cord Toolbox (SCT). Manual and automated measurements were compared using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). Percentage agreement and Cohen's kappa statistic were calculated to compare detection of midsagittal tissue bridges. Results: ICCs between the manual and automated measures were excellent (ICC 0.94, 95% CI 0.84-0.97, Conclusion: Measurements of midsagittal tissue bridges between manual and automated raters are reliable. Automated measurements may help to expedite research related to midsagittal tissue bridges and functional outcomes for individuals with SCI.
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.