ArticleThe open orthopaedics journal2013
A description of the methodology used in an overview of reviews to evaluate evidence on the treatment, harms, diagnosis/classification, prognosis and outcomes used in the management of neck pain.
Article in The open orthopaedics journal, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 3 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Combined diet and physical activity effects on health-related outcomes in people with overweight or obesity: an overview of systematic reviews.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Comparison of CPG's for the diagnosis, prognosis and management of non-specific neck pain: a systematic review.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2019Pooled it
- An introduction to overviews of reviews: planning a relevant research question and objective for an overview.Systematic reviews · 2018Article
- Analysis of cervical sagittal alignment variations after lumbar pedicle subtraction osteotomy for severe imbalance: study of 59 cases.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2018Article
- Psychological Care, Patient Education, Orthotics, Ergonomics and Prevention Strategies for Neck Pain: An Systematic Overview Update as Part of the ICON Project.The open orthopaedics journal · 2013Article
- Knowledge Translation Tools are Emerging to Move Neck Pain Research into Practice.The open orthopaedics journal · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNeck Pain (NP) is a common musculoskeletal disorder and the literature provides conflicting evidence about its management.
objectiveTo describe the methodology used to conduct an overview of reviews (OvR) and to characterize the distribution and risk of bias profiles across the evidence for all areas of NP management.
methodsStandard systematic review (SR) methodology was employed. MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, ILC, Cochrane CENTRAL, and LILACS were searched from 2000 to March 2012; Narrative and SR and clinical practice guidelines (CPG) evaluating the efficacy of treatment (benefits and harms), diagnosis/classification, prognosis, and outcomes were eligible. For treatment, articles were limited to SRs from 2005 forward. Risk of bias of SR was assessed with the AMSTAR; the AGREE II was used to critically appraise the CPGs.
resultsFrom 2476 articles, 508 were eligible for full text screening. A total of 341 articles were included. Treatment (n=117) had the greatest yield. Other clinical areas had less literature (diagnosis=54, prognosis=16, outcomes=27, harms=16). There were no SR for classification and narrative reviews were problematic for this topic. There was great overlap across different databases within each clinical area except for those for outcome measures. Risk of bias assessment using the AMSTAR of eligible SRs showed a similar trend across different clinical areas.
conclusionA summary of methods used to review the literature in five clinical areas of NP management have been described. The challenges of selecting and synthesizing eligible articles in an OvR required customized solutions across different areas of clinical focus.
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.