ArticleThe Journal of chiropractic education2014
Training and certification of doctors of chiropractic in delivering manual cervical traction forces: Results of a longitudinal observational study.
Article in The Journal of chiropractic education, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01765751 (Cervical Distraction Minimal Intervention Development), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
Cervical Distraction Minimal Intervention Development: Translating From Basic to Clinical Studies
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Chiropractic Management using Cox Technic Flexion Distraction for a Patient With Tandem Spinal Stenosis.Journal of chiropractic medicine · 2025Article
- Multimodal non-invasive non-pharmacological therapies for chronic pain: mechanisms and progress.BMC medicine · 2023Review
- High-velocity, low-amplitude spinal manipulation training of prescribed forces and thrust duration: A pilot study.The Journal of chiropractic education · 2020Article
- Establishing force and speed training targets for lumbar spine high-velocity, low-amplitude chiropractic adjustments.The Journal of chiropractic education · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objective : Doctors of chiropractic (DCs) use manual cervical distraction to treat patients with neck pain. Previous research demonstrates variability in traction forces generated by different DCs. This article reports on a training protocol and monthly certification process using bioengineering technology to standardize cervical traction force delivery among clinicians. Methods : This longitudinal observational study evaluated a training and certification process for DCs who provided force-based manual cervical distraction during a randomized clinical trial. The DCs completed a 7-week initial training that included instructional lectures, observation, and guided practice by a clinical expert, followed by 3 hours of weekly practice sessions delivering the technique to asymptomatic volunteers who served as simulated patients. An instrument-modified table and computer software provided the DCs with real-time audible and visual feedback on the traction forces they generated and graphical displays of the magnitude of traction forces as a function of time immediately after the delivery of the treatment. The DCs completed monthly certifications on traction force delivery throughout the trial. Descriptive accounts of certification attempts are provided. Results : Two DCs achieved certification in traction force delivery over 10 consecutive months. No certification required more than 3 attempts at C5 and occiput contacts for 3 force ranges (0-20 N, 21-50 N, and 51-100 N). Conclusions : This study demonstrates the feasibility of a training protocol and certification process using bioengineering technology for training DCs to deliver manual cervical distraction within specified traction force ranges over a 10-month period.
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.