Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11687191›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2001

Conservative treatment for whiplash.

A P Verhagen, G G Peeters, R A de Bie, R A Oostendorp

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

A P VerhagenDepartment of General Practice, Erasmus University Rotterdam, P.O. Box 1738, 3000 DR Rotterdam, Netherlands. Verhagen@hag.fgg.eur.nl
G G Peeters
R A de Bie
R A Oostendorp
Erasmus University Rotterdam · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMany treatments are available for whiplash-patients, but to date, no evidence exists for their effectiveness.

objectivesThe objective of this systematic review was to assess the efficacy of conservative treatment in patients with whiplash-injuries (rated as Whiplash-Associated Disorders [WAD] I or II). SEARCH STRATEGY: A computerized literature search of Medline, Embase, Cinahl, Psychlit and the Cochrane Controlled Trial Register through June 1998 was carried out. We also screened reference lists of publications of identified randomized trials and relevant systematic reviews. SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies were selected for inclusion if they fit the following criteria: design was a (randomized) clinical trial (RCT); all patients had suffered a whiplash-injury; the type of intervention was a conservative one; pain, global perceived effect, or participation in daily activities was used as one of the outcome measures; and the publication was written in English, French, German or Dutch. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The methodological quality of the studies was independently assessed by two reviewers using the Maastricht-Amsterdam list. Three quality scores were calculated using this criteria list: the Overall methodological Quality Score, the Internal Validity Score and the Delphi Quality Score. The conclusion of the review was based on articles that scored a quality score of at least 50 percent of the maximum available score on two out of three quality scores. MAIN

resultsEleven studies met the inclusion criteria. A broad variety of conservative interventions were evaluated, and only one study was performed in chronic whiplash patients. Only three studies satisfied at least 50 percent on two out of three quality scores indicating poor overall methodological quality. A high rank correlation was observed among the three methods of quality. Because of the heterogeneity of patient selection, interventions and outcome measures, no statistical pooling was performed. This review indicates that active treatments show a beneficial effect on at least one of the primary outcome measures, preferably pain. REVIEWER'S

conclusionsIt appears that "Rest makes rusty." In other words, rest and immobilization using collars are not recommended for the treatment of whiplash, while active interventions, such as advice to 'maintain usual activities' might be effective in whiplash-patients. Nevertheless, caution is needed when attempting to draw conclusions regarding the efficacy of conservative treatments in whiplash-patients, because of the paucity of high-quality studies. No conclusions can be drawn about the most effective therapy for chronic whiplash-patients because only one low quality trial was identified.

Indexed as

Activities of Daily LivingHumansImmobilizationRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRestWhiplash Injuries

Identifiers

PMID11687191
OpenAlexW4244912263

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.