Background/Objectives: Nutritional changes after spinal cord injury (SCI) can affect bodily appearance and experience, but their relationship with body-image is not consistently defined. This scoping review maps the constructs, measurements, and empirical contributions addressing this intersection. Methods: Guidance from the Joanna Briggs Institute and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews informed this review. Searches were conducted on 12 September 2026 and were updated on 16 October 2026 across clinical and psychological sources. Two reviewers independently assessed records and reports, with third-reviewer adjudication. Eligible evidence concerned acquired SCI at age 10 years or older or relevant professional perspectives, alongside distinguishable nutritional, and body-image domains. Quantitative associations, co-assessment, and qualitative connections were charted separately with design-specific appraisal and cohort linkage. Results: This review includes 36 reports published between 1989 and 2026: 24 contributed patient qualitative findings, 3 contributed professional qualitative perspectives, and 9 contributed quantitative findings. Weight change, perceived muscularity, abdominal appearance, and eating practices were connected with acceptance, attractiveness, and participation. Quantitative evidence combined a small number of direct relational analyses with descriptive co-assessment. Statistical inconsistencies, uncertain measurement properties, and shared samples limited interpretation. Improved satisfaction coexisted with increased adiposity in one uncontrolled report. Adolescent evidence remained sparse. Conclusions: Nutritional health and body-image warrant distinct measurement, even when considered together. The evidence identifies experiences and assessment gaps rather than a causal pathway or an effective combined intervention. Longitudinal construct-specific research is needed before the proposed rehabilitation applications can be evaluated.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Caliri et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: