Trial reportTrials2011
Outcomes of usual chiropractic, harm & efficacy, the ouch study: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Trials, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Spinal Manual Therapy for Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.BioMed research international · 2023Pooled it
- Manipulation and mobilisation for neck pain contrasted against an inactive control or another active treatment.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- Effects of thoracic manipulation with trigger point therapy on inflammatory cytokine levels in individuals with multiple sclerosis: a pilot study.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2026Trial
- Chiropractic treatment including instrument-assisted manipulation for non-specific dizziness and neck pain in community-dwelling older people: a feasibility randomised sham-controlled trial.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2018Trial
- Imaging use for low back pain by Ontario primary care clinicians: protocol for a mixed methods study - the Back ON study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2019Article
- What are the risks of manual treatment of the spine? A scoping review for clinicians.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2017Article
- Is there a role for neck manipulation in elderly falls prevention? - An overview.The Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association · 2015Article
- The simulated early learning of cervical spine manipulation technique utilising mannequins.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2015Article
- The association between pain diagram area, fear-avoidance beliefs, and pain catastrophising.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2014Article
- Short term treatment versus long term management of neck and back disability in older adults utilizing spinal manipulative therapy and supervised exercise: a parallel-group randomized clinical trial evaluating relative effectiveness and harms.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrevious studies have demonstrated that adverse events occur during chiropractic treatment. However, because of these studies design we do not know the frequency and extent of these events when compared to sham treatment. The principal aims of this study are to establish the frequency and severity of adverse effects from short term usual chiropractic treatment of the spine when compared to a sham treatment group. The secondary aim of this study is to establish the efficacy of usual short term chiropractic care for spinal pain when compared to a sham intervention.
methodsOne hundred and eighty participants will be randomly allocated to either usual chiropractic care or a sham intervention group. To be considered for inclusion the participants must have experienced non-specific spinal pain for at least one week. The study will be conducted at the clinics of registered chiropractors in Western Australia. Participants in each group will receive two treatments at intervals no less than one week. For the usual chiropractic care group, the selection of therapeutic techniques will be left to the chiropractors' discretion. For the sham intervention group, de-tuned ultrasound and de-tuned activator treatment will be applied by the chiropractors to the regions where spinal pain is experienced. Adverse events will be assessed two days after each appointment using a questionnaire developed for this study. The efficacy of short term chiropractic care for spinal pain will be examined at two week follow-up by assessing pain, physical function, minimum acceptable outcome, and satisfaction with care, with the use of the following outcome measures: Numerical Rating Scale, Functional Rating Index, Neck Disability Index, Minimum Acceptable Outcome Questionnaire, Oswestry Disability Index, and a global measure of treatment satisfaction. The statistician, outcome assessor, and participants will be blinded to treatment allocation.
trial registrationAustralia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Register (ANZCTR): ACTRN12611000542998.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.