14 replies to this topic

[goldnucs]

I've been doing some research on-line to try to obtain data regarding just how many SCI's there worldwide or, realistically, in the technologically-developed part of it anyway. Other than for the U.S., I can't seem to find anything. Supposedly, in the U.S there are some 250,000 with approx. 11,000 new injuries each year. 82% are male (seems high based on my experience).

Does anyone know where I can locate information for the UK or any other countries?

[wheeliebear75]

Well as far as the reason why it seems so many are male that is because more men than women do things like football/rugby other sports such as mountain climbing are predominantly male. Men tend to take more risks than women as a whole. But this is not to say that many men were not injured of no fault of their own, just wrong place wrong time & such. I would think that national spinal cord injury organizations would have some of the stats you're looking for.

[E-DOG]

11,000 a year is about right.
Now you can see why we get so little for research, help, etc.

More people die from fingernail cancer every month.

E

[goldnucs]

E-DOG, on Sep 2 2009, 03:52 PM, said:

11,000 a year is about right.
Now you can see why we get so little for research, help, etc.

More people die from fingernail cancer every month.

E

We need to combine our research efforts with the National Fingernail Cancer Foundation.

[Murray]

SCILife Archive > Issue 6.2, 2009
Strength in Numbers?
By K. Eric Larson, Executive Director and CEO, NSCIA

Recently released results of a national paralysis population survey have many in our community talking about numbers right now. Conducted by the University of New Mexico, and funded by the Christopher and Dana Reeve Foundation, the survey estimates that some 5,596,000 Americans are living with paralysis, including some 1.3 million with spinal cord injury.

RAN ACROSS THIS DATA AT THE NATIONAL SPINAL CORD ASSOCIATION SITE. PURDY STIFF NUMBERS. A COUPLE MORE THAN THE NAIL CANCER FOLK, POOR BUMS.

Lynn

[goldnucs]

Duh....I shoulda tried google answers in the first place! Good stuff.

http://answers.googl...dview?id=364371

[topperf]

goldnucs, on Sep 9 2009, 05:42 PM, said:

Duh....I shoulda tried google answers in the first place! Good stuff.

http://answers.googl...dview?id=364371

Yes - good stuff, but not exactly the right numbers. (see Murrays reply)

[Ches]

I didnt read the posted stats, could be repeating info.. but I read somewhere there's a new SCI every 40 minutes...

But if you do the math.. thats 36 ppl a day.. and thats 13,000+ a yr.. so maybe that was just the U.S. stats.

[araitn]

Yeah, Murray has the latest information.

For those interested in the details, here is a link to the Paralysis Resource Center page from the Christopher and Dana Reeve Foundation website.

[ButterflyInAmbr]

Why is there such a disparity in the numbers? I could understand a few thousand, yeah, but a million...? Is it just that they use different standards for who has an SCI and who doesn't?

[goldnucs]

Not much is known outside of the US, Canada, the UK and a few EU nations, but statistically, the numbers do kind of make sense. Here's what I've got so far: Columns are Total Population, PCI Rank (nation's Per Capita Income), Prevalence (how many living cases of SCI (by what definition(s) I can't say), "P as a % of Total Population, Incidence (new cases each year), Incidence as a % of Prevalence and Incidences as a % of Total Pop (in millions).

COUNTRY Total Pop. PCI Rank Prevalence P as % of Pop Incidence I as % of P I as % of Pop (M)

Norway 4,835,000 3 5,000 0.10% 100 2% 21
Singapore 4,839,000 4 14
United States 307,340,000 6 250,000 0.08% 11,500 5% 40
Switzerland 7,739,000 7
Kuwait 3,000,000 8
Netherlands 16,535,000 9 12,000 0.07% 450 4% 16
Austria 8,355,000 10
Canada 33,772,000 12 37,000 0.11% 1,450 4% 35
Sweden 9,292,000 13 150 20
UAE 4,600,000 14
Australia 22,000,000 15 10,000 0.05% 300 3% 13
Denmark 5,519,000 16
Germany 82,046,000 17 1,500 19
UK(incl. Ireland) 61,635,000 18 40,000 0.06% 800 2% 13
Belgium 10,754,000 19
France 65,073,000 21 930 32
Japan 127,590,000 23
Italy 60,088,000 24 700 12
Spain 46,000,000 25
EU 785,000,000 27 330,000 11,000 3% 14
Russia 141,862,000 47
Argentina 40,134,000 53
Mexico 107,550,000 54
Brazil 191,820,000 71 8,750 50
World 6,782,700,000 73 2,500,000 131,600 5% 20
South Africa 49,320,000 79 400 8
China 1,332,840,000 95 420,000 10,000 2% 8

[Murray]

goldnucs, on Sep 9 2009, 05:46 PM, said:

Not much is known outside of the US, Canada, the UK and a few EU nations, but statistically, the numbers do kind of make sense. Here's what I've got so far: Columns are Total Population, PCI Rank (nation's Per Capita Income), Prevalence (how many living cases of SCI (by what definition(s) I can't say), "P as a % of Total Population, Incidence (new cases each year), Incidence as a % of Prevalence and Incidences as a % of Total Pop (in millions).

COUNTRY Total Pop. PCI Rank Prevalence P as % of Pop Incidence I as % of P I as % of Pop (M)

Norway 4,835,000 3 5,000 0.10% 100 2% 21
Singapore 4,839,000 4 14
United States 307,340,000 6 250,000 0.08% 11,500 5% 40
Switzerland 7,739,000 7
Kuwait 3,000,000 8
Netherlands 16,535,000 9 12,000 0.07% 450 4% 16
Austria 8,355,000 10
Canada 33,772,000 12 37,000 0.11% 1,450 4% 35
Sweden 9,292,000 13 150 20
UAE 4,600,000 14
Australia 22,000,000 15 10,000 0.05% 300 3% 13
Denmark 5,519,000 16
Germany 82,046,000 17 1,500 19
UK(incl. Ireland) 61,635,000 18 40,000 0.06% 800 2% 13
Belgium 10,754,000 19
France 65,073,000 21 930 32
Japan 127,590,000 23
Italy 60,088,000 24 700 12
Spain 46,000,000 25
EU 785,000,000 27 330,000 11,000 3% 14
Russia 141,862,000 47
Argentina 40,134,000 53
Mexico 107,550,000 54
Brazil 191,820,000 71 8,750 50
World 6,782,700,000 73 2,500,000 131,600 5% 20
South Africa 49,320,000 79 400 8
China 1,332,840,000 95 420,000 10,000 2% 8

OK - I'm gonna stick my neck out here and pretend I'm not the only dumb suckerbait in the bunch.
goldnucs - get out the crayons and construction paper, and tell me what these columns mean. I don't know statistical analysis ... or whatever ... and don't understand what is meant by "Incidence as a percentage of prevalence" (Did I get that right?). Help out this ol' fart. (The rest o' you chickens can piggy back on my ignorance.)

[goldnucs]

Quote

OK - I'm gonna stick my neck out here and pretend I'm not the only dumb suckerbait in the bunch.
goldnucs - get out the crayons and construction paper, and tell me what these columns mean. I don't know statistical analysis ... or whatever ... and don't understand what is meant by "Incidence as a percentage of prevalence" (Did I get that right?). Help out this ol' fart. (The rest o' you chickens can piggy back on my ignorance.)

Yeah sorry, the columns didn't print in here like on my spreadsheet.

Incidence as a percentage of prevalence is just how many new cases there are each year relative to the total number of people living with SCI..,not a meaningful statistic other than as to see if there is a correlation to other countries, which there is.

[Murray]

goldnucs, on Sep 10 2009, 04:43 PM, said:

Quote

OK - I'm gonna stick my neck out here and pretend I'm not the only dumb suckerbait in the bunch.
goldnucs - get out the crayons and construction paper, and tell me what these columns mean. I don't know statistical analysis ... or whatever ... and don't understand what is meant by "Incidence as a percentage of prevalence" (Did I get that right?). Help out this ol' fart. (The rest o' you chickens can piggy back on my ignorance.)

Yeah sorry, the columns didn't print in here like on my spreadsheet.

Incidence as a percentage of prevalence is just how many new cases there are each year relative to the total number of people living with SCI..,not a meaningful statistic other than as to see if there is a correlation to other countries, which there is.

...thanks.... I guess. All I'm trying to do now is decide the easiest way to deliver this (some of it) to the Support Group ... and what is its significance. Does it imply certain hypotheses about care in the US, wrecklessness (?) in the US, other compared/contrasted to other countries? Etc.

[goldnucs]

Quote

...thanks.... I guess. All I'm trying to do now is decide the easiest way to deliver this (some of it) to the Support Group ... and what is its significance. Does it imply certain hypotheses about care in the US, wrecklessness (?) in the US, other compared/contrasted to other countries? Etc.

Well, beyond being statistics, they're not really good for anything. I just find the correlations across international "property lines" fascinating. Insofar as "wreckless", I think to the extent of politically irresponsible.