This website uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some of these cookies are used for visitor analysis, others are essential to making our site function properly and improve the user experience. By using this site, you consent to the placement of these cookies. Click Accept to consent and dismiss this message or Deny to leave this website. Read our Privacy Statement for more.
Position Statements Policy

Position Statements Policy

ISCoS Position Statements provide clear, credible guidance on issues of international relevance to the spinal cord injury community, helping inform practice, policy, research and advocacy. This policy sets out the principles, required elements and approval pathway for developing Position Statements, including consultation and final endorsement through ISCoS governance. Position Statements are concise and evidence-grounded, and do not recommend specific treatments (which should be addressed through Clinical Practice Guidelines using recognised methodology).

 
 
Governance Document
ISCoS Position Statements Policy (PDF)

Approved by the Executive Committee • 17 December 2025

Download the official policy document which defines scope, structure, consultation requirements, and the review and approval process for ISCoS Position Statements.

 

Key points in this policy

 
Purpose & credibility

Ensures Position Statements are credible, relevant, and reflect broad ISCoS consensus.

!
Not a treatment guideline

Position Statements do not recommend specific treatments; these belong in Clinical Practice Guidelines.

Who can develop

Developed via ISCoS Committees/SDGs/SIGs (or a Working Party under them). Affiliated groups can propose but not develop.

Co-design & consultation

Where statements directly concern people with SCI, co-design principles and lived experience should be included in development/consultation.

Format & core elements

Concise and structured, with a clear statement plus documentation covering scope, method, consultation and implementation.

Approval pathway

Committee review → member/stakeholder consultation → revised draft review → endorsement via Executive/Board (optional member vote if required).