Cited by 2,094Spinal Cord Injury ResearchStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryMedical Practices and Rehabilitation

Targeting Recovery: Priorities of the Spinal Cord-Injured Population

Anderson, Kim D.·2004·Journal of Neurotrauma

Abstract

In the United States alone, there are more than 200,000 individuals living with a chronic spinal cord injury (SCI). Healthcare for these individuals creates a significant economic burden for the country, not to mention the physiological, psychological, and social suffering these people endure everyday. Regaining partial function can lead to greater independence, thereby improving quality of life. To ascertain what functions are most important to the SCI population, in regard to enhancing quality of life, a novel survey was performed in which subjects were asked to rank seven functions in order of importance to their quality of life. The survey was distributed via email, postal mail, the internet, interview, and word of mouth to the SCI community at large. A total of 681 responses were completed. Regaining arm and hand function was most important to quadriplegics, while regaining sexual function was the highest priority for paraplegics. Improving bladder and bowel function was of shared importance to both injury groups. A longitudinal analysis revealed only slight differences between individuals injured <3 years compared to those injured >3 years. The majority of participants indicated that exercise was important to functional recovery, yet more than half either did not have access to exercise or did not have access to a trained therapist to oversee that exercise. In order to improve the relevance of research in this area, the concerns of the SCI population must be better known and taken into account. This approach is consistent with and emphasized by the new NIH roadmap to discovery.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1089/neu.2004.21.1371

Cites

87 of 87 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Anderson, K. D.
Affiliations
University of California, Irvine (US)
Corresponding author
Anderson, Kim D.
Venue
Journal of Neurotrauma
Published
2004-10
Volume
21
Issue
10
Pages
1371-1383
ISSN
  • 0897-7151 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-9042
OpenAlex
W2012924135
Cited by
2,094
References
87
Citations by year
2026: 124 · 2025: 137 · 2024: 122 · 2023: 150 · 2022: 162 · 2021: 168 · 2020: 141 · 2019: 138 · 2018: 108 · 2017: 98 · 2016: 100 · 2015: 93 · 2014: 99 · 2013: 81 · 2012: 79
FWCI
15.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Neurotrauma (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Spinal Cord Injury Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Medical Practices and Rehabilitation
Keywords
spinal cord injury, quality of life, tetraplegia, paraplegia, arm and hand function, sexual function, bowel and bladder function, exercise therapy, patient preferences, chronic spinal cord injury
MeSH terms
Activities of Daily Living, Female, Humans, Male, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Spinal Cord Injuries, Recovery of Function

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review