ArticleTopics in spinal cord injury rehabilitation2025
International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury: Case Examples Reinforcing Concepts From the 2019 Revision.
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 1 paper.
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.
- International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury: Classification Questions and Cases.Topics in spinal cord injury rehabilitation · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury (ISNCSCI) is the most widely accepted system for characterizing sensorimotor impairments after spinal cord injury (SCI). There have been a number of ISNCSCI revisions, with the most recent edition published in 2019. Newer concepts, including the revised definitions of the zones of partial preservation (ZPPs) and documentation of non-SCI conditions, require training and practice for successful utilization. The International Standards Committee developed an ISNCSCI workbook of 26 practice cases, each with detailed explanations of the correct classification components. In this article, we present seven cases, which were selected from the workbook to reinforce the changes implemented in 2019. Methods: Hypothetical ISNCSCI cases were created to illustrate important classification rules, definitions, and nuances. All cases were reviewed by members of the American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) International Standards Committee, and if any discrepancies were identified, they were discussed until a consensus was reached. To confirm agreement, cases were also entered into online algorithms, which are compliant with the 2019 ISNCSCI revision. The seven cases in this article highlight newer classification concepts and include a discussion of key elements. Cases: Each case reinforces the revised definitions of the ZPPs, such as the applicability of sensory ZPPs in all injuries without sensory sacral sparing and applicability of motor ZPPs in all injuries without voluntary anal contraction (VAC). Non-SCI-related impairments and their impact on the classification are reviewed in Cases 4-7. Conclusion: The seven cases presented in this article feature key concepts from the 2019 ISNCSCI revision. These cases, as well as the full ISNCSCI workbook, can serve as valuable training tools to improve classification accuracy.
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.