SynthesisPloS one2014
Non-surgical interventions for adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis: an overview of systematic reviews.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Therapeutic exercises for idiopathic scoliosis in adolescents.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Effectiveness of psychosocial interventions for pediatric patients with scoliosis: a systematic review.World journal of pediatric surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Trial
- A scoping review of published reviews on the use of bracing in scoliosis.Spine deformity · 2026Article
- Editorial: Insights in rehabilitation for musculoskeletal conditions 2023/2024.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2025Article
- Review
- Case Report on Visceral Manipulation in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis.International journal of therapeutic massage & bodywork · 2022Article
- Efficacy of conservative treatment on exacerbation of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.Journal of exercise rehabilitation · 2022Article
- No Recommendation Is (at Least Presently) the Best Recommendation: An Updating Quality Appraisal of Recommendations on Screening for Scoliosis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Screening for scoliosis - New recommendations, old dilemmas, no straight solutions.World journal of orthopedics · 2020Review
- Mapping the evidence of experiences related to adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a scoping review protocol.BMJ open · 2019Article
- Review of scoliosis-specific exercise methods used to correct adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.Archives of physiotherapy · 2019Review
- Article
- Global postural re-education in pediatric idiopathic scoliosis: a biomechanical modeling and analysis of curve reduction during active and assisted self-correction.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2018Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNon-surgical interventions for adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis remain highly controversial. Despite the publication of numerous reviews no explicit methodological evaluation of papers labeled as, or having a layout of, a systematic review, addressing this subject matter, is available.
objectivesAnalysis and comparison of the content, methodology, and evidence-base from systematic reviews regarding non-surgical interventions for adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis.
designSystematic overview of systematic reviews.
methodsArticles meeting the minimal criteria for a systematic review, regarding any non-surgical intervention for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis, with any outcomes measured, were included. Multiple general and systematic review specific databases, guideline registries, reference lists and websites of institutions were searched. The AMSTAR tool was used to critically appraise the methodology, and the Oxford Centre for Evidence Based Medicine and the Joanna Briggs Institute's hierarchies were applied to analyze the levels of evidence from included reviews.
resultsFrom 469 citations, twenty one papers were included for analysis. Five reviews assessed the effectiveness of scoliosis-specific exercise treatments, four assessed manual therapies, five evaluated bracing, four assessed different combinations of interventions, and one evaluated usual physical activity. Two reviews addressed the adverse effects of bracing. Two papers were high quality Cochrane reviews, Three were of moderate, and the remaining sixteen were of low or very low methodological quality. The level of evidence of these reviews ranged from 1 or 1+ to 4, and in some reviews, due to their low methodological quality and/or poor reporting, this could not be established.
conclusionsHigher quality reviews indicate that generally there is insufficient evidence to make a judgment on whether non-surgical interventions in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis are effective. Papers labeled as systematic reviews need to be considered in terms of their methodological rigor; otherwise they may be mistakenly regarded as high quality sources of evidence. PROTOCOL REGISTRY NUMBER: CRD42013003538, PROSPERO.
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.