Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26136610›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association2015

Craniocervical chiropractic procedures - a précis of upper cervical chiropractic.

H Charles Woodfield, Craig York, Roderic P Rochester, Scott Bales, Mychal Beebe, Bryan Salminen, Jeffrey N Scholten

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

H Charles WoodfieldDirector of Research - Upper Cervical Research Foundation, Minneapolis, MN.
Craig YorkPrivate practice, Morrilton, AR, USA.
Roderic P RochesterPrivate practice, Clarkesville, GA, USA.
Scott BalesPrivate practice, Alliston, ON, CN.
Mychal BeebePrivate practice, Seattle, WA, USA.
Bryan SalminenPrivate practice, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Jeffrey N ScholtenPrivate practice, Calgary, AB, CN.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Presented here is a narrative review of upper cervical procedures intended to facilitate understanding and to increase knowledge of upper cervical chiropractic care. Safety, efficacy, common misconceptions, and research are discussed, allowing practitioners, chiropractic students, and the general public to make informed decisions regarding utilization and referrals for this distinctive type of chiropractic care. Upper cervical techniques share the same theoretical paradigm in that the primary subluxation exists in the upper cervical spine. These procedures use similar assessments to determine if spinal intervention is necessary and successful once delivered. The major difference involves their use of either an articular or orthogonal radiograph analysis model when determining the presence of a misalignment. Adverse events following an upper cervical adjustment consist of mild symptomatic reactions of short-duration (< 24-hours). Due to a lack of quality and indexed references, information contained herein is limited by the significance of literature cited, which included non-indexed and/or non-peer reviewed sources.

Indexed as

adverse eventsatlascervicalchiropracticchiropractic adjustmentcraniocervical

Identifiers

PMID26136610
PMCPMC4486989

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.