Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Feb 1;9(1):e025076.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025076.

Systematic scoping review protocol for clinical prediction rules (CPRs) in the management of patients with spinal cord injuries

Blake Boggenpoel  1 , Vuyolwethu Madasa  1 , Tarryn Jeftha  1 , Conran Joseph  1   2
Affiliations

Systematic scoping review protocol for clinical prediction rules (CPRs) in the management of patients with spinal cord injuries

Blake Boggenpoel et al. BMJ Open. .

Abstract

Introduction: The upsurge in the use of clinical prediction models in general medical practice is a result of evidence-based practice. However, the total number of clinical prediction rules (CPRs) currently being used or undergoing impact analysis in the management of patients who have sustained spinal cord injuries (SCIs) is unknown. This scoping review protocol will describe the current CPRs being used and highlight their possible strengths and weaknesses in SCI management.

Methods and analysis: Arksey and O'Malley's scoping review framework will be used. The following databases will be searched to identify relevant literature relating to the use of CPRs in the management of patients who have sustained an SCI: PubMed, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), ScienceDirect, EBSCOhost, Medline, OvidMedline and Google Scholar. Grey literature as well as reference lists of included studies will be searched. All studies relating to the use of CPRs in the management of patients with SCIs will be included. Literature searches and data extraction will be performed independently by two groups of reviewers.

Ethics and dissemination: Ethical clearance is not required for this scoping review study since only secondary data sources will be used. The findings of this review will be disseminated by means of peer-reviewed publication and conference proceedings. The final paper will be submitted for publication. Results of this review will also be presented at relevant conferences and disseminated to important stakeholders such as practicing physicians within specialised spinal care facilities within South Africa.

Keywords: clinical prediction rules; decision support techniques; diagnostic; prognostic; spinal cord injuries.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

References

    1. Smith M, Higgs J, Ellis E. Factors influencing clinical decision making, Clinical reasoning in the health professions . 2008;3:89–100.
    1. Cook CE. Potential pitfalls of clinical prediction rules. J Man Manip Ther 2008;16:69–71. 10.1179/106698108790818477 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Reilly BM, Evans AT. Translating clinical research into clinical practice: impact of using prediction rules to make decisions. Ann Intern Med 2006;144:201–9. 10.7326/0003-4819-144-3-200602070-00009 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Tetreault L, Le D, Côté P, et al. . The practical application of clinical prediction rules: A commentary using case examples in surgical patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy. Global Spine J 2015;5:457–65. 10.1055/s-0035-1567838 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bae JM. The clinical decision analysis using decision tree. Epidemiol Health 2014;36:e2014025 10.4178/epih/e2014025 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types