ArticleThe journal of spinal cord medicine2026
Verification of item difficulty in the Capabilities of Upper Extremity Test using Rasch analysis for individuals with cervical spinal cord injury.
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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe Capabilities of Upper Extremity Test (CUE-T) is a tool that can assess upper limb function in more detail for cervical spinal cord injury (CSCI). This study aimed to determine the degree of difficulty of the CUE-T subtests.
designThis was a cross-sectional study.
settingThis study was conducted with participants from the Chiba Rehabilitation Center in Japan.
participantsA total of 176 data sets were collected from 100 individuals with CSCI (mean age: 59.2 ± 13.8 years; men: 86, women: 14).
interventionsWe assessed the structural validity of the CUE-T for CSCI using Rasch analysis based on the Rasch Reporting Guidelines in Rehabilitation Research framework. OUTCOME MEASURES: CUE-T.
resultsThe 17 items did not conform to the assumptions of Rasch analysis, such as unidimensionality and local dependence. Therefore, the Rasch analysis was reanalyzed using 10 items, excluding the seven items that were misfit by the item goodness of fit. The most difficult item was the Push Thumb, and the easiest item was Pull.
conclusionsThe CUE-T showed good structural validity for 10 items. Indicated the degree of difficulty was similar to the neurological perspective, therefore, it may reflect the clinical practice of upper limb function in CSCI. These results may be useful for setting the difficulty level for rehabilitation of upper limb function in CSCI and for developing better evaluation methods in the future.
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.