Objectives: To illustrate the importance of multiple search terms and databases when searching publications on spinal cord damage not due to trauma. Conclusions: Concise searches using terms 'non-traumatic spinal cord injury' and 'nontraumatic spinal cord injury' fail to identify relevant articles unless combinations of terms and databases are used. These are inadequate search terms for a comprehensive search. Further research is needed to validate our comprehensive search filter. An international consensus process is required to establish an agreed term for 'spinal cord damage not due to trauma.' Keywords: Information storage and retrieval, Spinal cord diseases, Spinal cord injury, Systematized nomenclature of medicine, TerminologyThat which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.1 Although Shakespeare's perspective on names can be generalized to healthcare, there is a compromise when multiple non-standard terms are used to describe the same entity. In relation to spinal cord medicine, for example, evidence suggests that all patients with spinal cord damage, irrespective of their etiology (i.e. 'the name'), should be able to access specialist rehabilitation services without bias or discrimination.
2,3However, patients with spinal cord damage not due to trauma do not always have this equity of access. 2,3 In addressing this, and other research agendas involving these patients, a major compromise occurs because there is no accepted general collective term for this group of disorders. It is essential, however, in healthcare to have consistent vocabulary and definitions to facilitate discussion and knowledge transfer among planners, managers, educators, clinicians, and researchers. This is extremely important with regard to having consistent terms for searching the literature, which is a vital component of evidence-based medicine. 4 Furthermore, efficient and timely access to pertinent information is a vital part of the evidence-based healthcare process. Clinicians and health planners have an enormous challenge in dealing with the volume of published information, particularly knowing where and how to search, and how to appraise the quality of information.