Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40873962›Full record

ArticleTopics in spinal cord injury rehabilitation2025

Model-Based Prediction of Motor Scores From Sensory Scores in the International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury (ISNCSCI): Implications on Motor Levels in Segments Without Clinically Testable Key Muscles.

Christian Schuld, Viktoria Gavrilova, Laura Heutehaus, Doris Maier, Rainer Abel, Norbert Weidner, EMSCI Study Group, Ruediger Rupp, Steffen Franz, European Multicenter Study about Spinal Cord Injury (EMSCI) Study Group

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

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. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Christian SchuldSpinal Cord Injury Center, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
Viktoria GavrilovaSpinal Cord Injury Center, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
Laura HeutehausSpinal Cord Injury Center, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
Doris MaierClinic for Paraplegia, Klinikum Bayreuth GmbH, Bayreuth, Germany.
Rainer AbelSpinal Cord Injuries, Berufsgenossenschaftliche Unfallklinik Murnau, Murnau, Germany.
Norbert WeidnerSpinal Cord Injury Center, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
EMSCI Study Group
Ruediger RuppSpinal Cord Injury Center, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
Steffen FranzSpinal Cord Injury Center, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
European Multicenter Study about Spinal Cord Injury (EMSCI) Study Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: In the International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury (ISNCSCI), motor levels are inferred from sensory levels for high cervical, thoracic, and low sacral injuries, as key muscles are only assessed in upper and lower extremities. This is known as the "motor follows sensory level" rule. Objectives: To develop regression models for estimating motor scores from sensory scores in segments without clinically testable key muscles and to validate the consensus-based "motor follows sensory level" approach. Methods: A total of 6940 ISNCSCI examinations from the European Multicenter Study about Spinal Cord Injury were reviewed. Multiple linear and random forest regression models were trained on scores in clinically testable segments to predict motor from sensory scores of the same spinal segment and side. Models based on ipsilateral light touch or pinprick scores alone, as well as all bilateral sensory scores, were also evaluated. Predicted motor scores were used to recalculate motor levels for the segments without clinically testable key muscles and compared to the true motor levels. Results: The ipsilateral regression models showed minimal differences ( Conclusion: As models predict normal motor function only for normal sensory scores, predicted motor levels deviate only marginally, supporting the "motor follows sensory level" rule.

Indexed as

Muscle, SkeletalNeurologic ExaminationSpinal Cord InjuriesAdultFemaleHumansMaleISNCSCImachine learningmotor levelmotor score estimationmultiple linear regressionrandom forest regressionspinal cord injury

Identifiers

PMID40873962
PMCPMC12376152

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.