Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42251200›Full record

SynthesisSpinal cord2026

Female participation in randomized controlled trials of motor rehabilitation after spinal cord injury: a systematic review.

Lindsay Cameron, Sarah Ryan, Andrew Bowman, Emma A Bateman, Janice J Eng, Swati Mehta, Keith Sequeira, Robert Teasell

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Spinal cord, 2026. 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

8 authors.

Lindsay CameronLawson Research Institute at St. Joseph's Health Care London, London, Ontario, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0007-7133-3784
Sarah RyanLawson Research Institute at St. Joseph's Health Care London, London, Ontario, Canada.
Andrew BowmanLawson Research Institute at St. Joseph's Health Care London, London, Ontario, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0002-1146-2051
Emma A BatemanLawson Research Institute at St. Joseph's Health Care London, London, Ontario, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5069-3058
Janice J EngDepartment of Physical Therapy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2093-0788
Swati MehtaDepartment of Kinesiology, Faculty of Human Kinetics, University of Windsor, Windsor, Ontario, Canada.
Keith SequeiraDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
Robert TeasellLawson Research Institute at St. Joseph's Health Care London, London, Ontario, Canada. Robert.Teasell@sjhc.london.on.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2644-7957

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

STUDY

designSystematic Review

objectivesThe objective of this study was to investigate female participation in spinal cord injury (SCI) motor rehabilitation randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which included the overall proportion of female participants and how this proportion changed with time post-injury (TPI), study quality and the intervention investigated.

methodsSystematic searches were conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo and CINAHL databases inclusive to December 31, 2024. Study eligibility included RCTs or RCT crossovers published in English and investigated an intervention for motor rehabilitation on adult participants with traumatic and/or non-traumatic SCI. Data from the RCTs was extracted and summarized using online Excel, with statistical analyses conducted in RStudio.

resultsOverall, 252 RCTs met the inclusion criteria and were included in the dataset. Of these, 237 RCTs reported the sex of participants. The overall proportion of female participants was 22.4%, with no significant changes between 2000 and 2024. No significant differences were found between the proportion of female participants and TPI. High quality studies had significantly higher female participation compared to low quality studies (p = 0.008). Significantly higher female participation was found in RCTs investigating technology-based interventions (p < 0.001), with no significant differences found in pharmacological or non-technology-based interventions.

conclusionsThe underrepresentation of female participants in studies of SCI motor rehabilitation limits the generalizability of research results and potentially hinders the availability of rehabilitation strategies for female individuals. Understanding what challenges may be preventing higher enrollment and implementing recruitment strategies may aid in increasing the number of female participants in SCI rehabilitation RCTs.

Indexed as

Neurological RehabilitationRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSpinal Cord InjuriesFemaleHumans

Identifiers

PMID42251200

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.