Reporting trends of spinal cord injury research representation: A media content analysis

Disability and Health Journal

Volumn 4, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 121-128

  Kehn, Matthew ^a   Kroll, Thilo ^b  

^a NATIONAL REHABILITATION HOSPITAL   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF DUNDEE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Media; Rehabilitation; Reporting trends; Spinal cord injury; Stem cell research

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLICATION; SPINAL CORD INJURY;

ACCIDENTS; BIBLIOMETRICS; FAMOUS PERSONS; HUMANS; NEWSPAPERS; POLICY; SPINAL CORD INJURIES; STEM CELL RESEARCH; UNITED STATES;

EID: 79952816109     PISSN: 19366574     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.dhjo.2010.09.001     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Christopher and Dana Reeve Foundation: Pre-Release Briefing: Prevalence of paralysis including spinal cord injuries in the United States, 2008. Available at: http://www.christopherreeve.org/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c= ddJFKRNoFiG&b=4455033&ct=6928829.
2. Spinal Cord Injury Information Network: Facts & Figures at a Glance. Available at: www.spinalcord.uab.edu. Accessed March 23, 2009.
3. Kogos SC, DeVivo MJ, Richards JS. Recent trends in spinal cord injury rehabilitation practices and outcomes. Top Spinal Cord Injury Rehabil. 2004;10(2):49-57. (Pubitemid 40050972)
4. Institute of Medicine: Consensus Report. Spinal Cord Injury: Progress, Promise and Priorities. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2005.
5. Council of Europe, Parliamentary Assembly, Social, Health and Family Affairs Committee, Report: Towards Concerted Efforts for Treating and Curing Spinal Cord Injury. Council on Europe, Doc. 9401, 2009.
6. Kingdon J. Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. 2nd ed. Addison-Wesley Educational Publishers. University of Michigan; 1995.
7. Howlett M, Ramesh M. Studying Public Policy: Policy Cycles and Policy Subsystems. Ontario: Oxford University Press; 2003.
8. Institute of Medicine. The Future of Disability in America. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2007.
9. Deacon D, Pickering M, Golding P, et al. Researching Communications: A Practical Guide to Methods in Media and Cultural Analysis. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2007.
10. Gallup. Gallup's Poll of Democracy: Stem Cell Research. Available at: http://www.gallup.com/poll/21676/Stem-Cell-Research.aspx. Accessed March 27, 2009.
11. Pew Research Center. The Pew Forum on Religious and Public Life, July 2008. Available at: http://pewforum.org/docs/?DocID5317. Accessed March 27, 2009.
12. Leach J, Yates S, Scanlon E. Models of science communication. In: Holliman R, Whitelegg E, Scanlon E, eds. Investigating Science Communication in the Information Age: Implications for Public Engagement and Popular Media. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2009:128-146.
13. Nisbet MC, Mooney C. Framing science. Science. 2007;316:56.
14. Nisbet MC, Scheufele DA. The future of public engagement. Scientist. 2007. October:39-44.
15. Thomas J. Controversy and consensus. In: Holliman R, Thomas J, Smidt S, eds. Practicing Science Communication in the Information Age: Theorising Professional Practices. New York: Oxford University Press; 2009:131-148.
16. Hahn H. Alternative views of empowerment: social services and civil rights. J Rehabil. 1991;57.
17. Hahn H. Toward a politics of disability: definitions, disciplines, and policies. Soc Sci J. 1985;22(4):87-105.
18. Hahn H. The political implications of disability definitions and data. J Disabil Pol Stud. 1993;4(2):41-52.
19. Ozer MN, Kroll T. Patient-centered rehabilitation: problems and opportunities. Crit Rev Phys Rehabil Med. 2002;14(3-4):273-289. (Pubitemid 36529495)
20. Lippman A. Prenatal genetic testing and screening: constructing needs and reinforcing inequities. Am J Law Med. 1991;17(1-2):15-50.