Trial reportThe spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society2018
Dose-response and efficacy of spinal manipulation for care of cervicogenic headache: a dual-center randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01530321 (Dose-Response of Manipulation for Cervicogenic Headache), which is not on this map. Cited by 23 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.
Dose-Response of Manipulation for Cervicogenic Headache
Who cites it
23 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.
- The majority of clinical trials assessing mobilization and manipulation for neck pain lack a pragmatic approach: a systematic review of 174 trials.The Journal of manual & manipulative therapy · 2024Pooled it
- Massage for neck pain.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- The effectiveness of manual and exercise therapy on headache intensity and frequency among patients with cervicogenic headache: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2022Pooled it
- Trial
- Multimodal chiropractic care for migraine: A pilot randomized controlled trial.Cephalalgia : an international journal of headache · 2021Trial
- Effectiveness of chiropractic manipulation versus sham manipulation for recurrent headaches in children aged 7-14 years - a randomised clinical trial.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2021Trial
- The Biomechanical Analysis of Magnitude and Direction of Force by Different Techniques of Thoracic Spinal Manipulation.BioMed research international · 2020Trial
- Tuina Combined with Acupuncture and Other Therapies for Treating Cervicogenic Headache: A Network Meta-Analysis Based on Randomized Controlled Trials.Journal of pain research · 2026Review
- Clinical features, risk factors, and a nomogram for predicting refractory cervicogenic headache: a retrospective multivariate analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
- Efficacy of manual therapy on shoulder pain and function in patients with rotator cuff injury: A systematic review and meta‑analysis.Biomedical reports · 2024Article
- Utilizing machine learning to predict post-treatment outcomes in chronic non-specific neck pain patients undergoing cervical extension traction.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Review
- Effects of meridian sinew tuina after identifying the treatment area under ultrasound localization combined with greater and third occipital nerve injections in cervicogenic headache: a randomized controlled trial protocol.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Article
- Dosing of lumbar spinal manipulative therapy and its association with escalated spine care: A cohort study of insurance claims.PloS one · 2024Article
- The Role of Manual Therapies in the Treatment of Headache Disorders.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2023Review
- Neural Basis of Etiopathogenesis and Treatment of Cervicogenic Orofacial Pain.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Review
- The Effects of 4 Weeks of Chiropractic Spinal Adjustments on Motor Function in People with Stroke: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Brain sciences · 2021Article
- Clinical Effectiveness and Efficacy of Chiropractic Spinal Manipulation for Spine Pain.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Segmental Chiropractic Spinal Manipulation Does not Reduce Pain Amplification and the Associated Pain-Related Brain Activity in a Capsaicin-Heat Pain Model.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Occipital Neuralgia and Cervicogenic Headache: Diagnosis and Management.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
background contextThe optimal number of visits for the care of cervicogenic headache (CGH) with spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) is unknown. PURPOSE: The present study aimed to identify the dose-response relationship between visits for SMT and chronic CGH outcomes and to evaluate the efficacy of SMT by comparison with a light-massage control. STUDY DESIGN/
settingThis is a two-site, open-label randomized controlled trial. PATIENT SAMPLE: Participants were 256 adults with chronic CGH. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was days with CGH in the previous 4 weeks evaluated at the 12- and 24-week primary end points. Secondary outcomes included CGH days at remaining end points, pain intensity, disability, perceived improvement, medication use, and patient satisfaction.
methodsParticipants were randomized to four dose levels of chiropractic SMT: 0, 6, 12, or 18 sessions. They were treated three times per week for 6 weeks and received a focused light-massage control at sessions when SMT was not assigned. Linear dose effects and comparisons with the no-manipulation control group were evaluated at 6, 12, 24, 39, and 52 weeks. The present study was funded by the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (R01AT006330) and is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01530321). The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
resultsA linear dose-response was observed for all follow-ups, a reduction of approximately 1 CGH day/4 weeks per additional 6 SMT visits (p<.05); a maximal effective dose could not be determined. Cervicogenic headache days/4 weeks were reduced from about 16 to 8 for the highest and most effective dose of 18 SMT visits. Mean differences in CGH days/4 weeks between 18 SMT visits and control were -3.3 (p=.004) and -2.9 (p=.017) at the primary end points, and were similar in magnitude at the remaining end points (p<.05). Differences between other SMT doses and control were smaller in magnitude (p>.05). Cervicogenic headache intensity showed no important improvement nor differed by dose. Other secondary outcomes were generally supportive of the primary outcome.
conclusionsThere was a linear dose-response relationship between SMT visits and days with CGH. For the highest and most effective dose of 18 SMT visits, CGH days were reduced by half and about 3 more days per month than for the light-massage control.
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.