Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42375007›Full record

ArticleJournal of rehabilitation medicine2026

Ambulatory individuals with spinal cord injury using walking aids generally do not report better long-term outcomes than wheelchair users: results from the InSCI-NL survey.

Marthe C G Langerwerf, Karin Postma, Janneke Stolwijk-Swuste, Marga Tepper, Majanka Heijenbrok-Kal, Marcel Post, Rita J G Van den Berg-Emons, Rutger Osterthun

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of rehabilitation 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.

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.

Marthe C G LangerwerfDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Rijndam Rehabilitation Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands. m.langerwerf@erasmusmc.nl.
Karin PostmaDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Rijndam Rehabilitation Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-0729-6778
Janneke Stolwijk-SwusteKnowledge Centre Rehabilitation Medicine, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-6793-691X
Marga TepperDepartment of Rehabilitation medicine, University of Groningen, UMC Groningen, Center of Rehabilitation, Groningen, the Netherlands
Majanka Heijenbrok-KalDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre Rotterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2982-4404
Marcel PostKnowledge Centre Rehabilitation Medicine, UMC Utrecht, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2205-9404
Rita J G Van den Berg-EmonsDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre Rotterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-6433-3398
Rutger OsterthunDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Rijndam Rehabilitation Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-9809-7311

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveGreater mobility independence after spinal cord injury is thought to lead to better long-term outcomes. However, evidence is inconclusive for ambulation compared with wheelchair dependency. This study aimed to describe and compare long-term outcomes across mobility levels in individuals with spinal cord injury.

designCross-sectional survey. SUBJECTS: Community-dwelling individuals with spinal cord injury in the Netherlands.

methodsData were collected via the Dutch arm of the International Spinal Cord Injury (InSCI-NL) Survey (2018). Mobility level was assessed using the modified Spinal Cord Independence Measure-Self-Report. Long-term outcomes were compared across mobility levels, using generalised linear models.

results253 participants were included with a mean (standard deviation) age of 58.7 (13.6) years and median [interquartile range] time since injury of 10 [5.0-22.0] years. Electric wheelchair users reported lower functional independence, and more participation problems and secondary health conditions compared with manual wheelchair users (p < 0.001). Ambulatory individuals using walking aids reported no better outcomes than manual wheelchair users, except for functional independence (p < 0.001). Ambulatory individuals without walking aids reported more paid work than those with walking aids (62.7% vs 34.3%, p < 0.001).

conclusionIn general, electric wheelchair users reported the least favourable long-term outcomes. Remarkably, ambulatory individuals using walking aids generally did not report better outcomes than manual wheelchair users.

Indexed as

Spinal Cord InjuriesWalkingWheelchairsAdultAgedCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansIndependent LivingMaleMiddle AgedNetherlandsSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID42375007
PMCPMC13330643

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.