Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31007897›Full record

ArticleChiropractic & manual therapies2019

The shape of chiropractic in Europe: a cross sectional survey of chiropractor's beliefs and practice.

Halldór Fannar Gíslason, Jari Kullervo Salminen, Linn Sandhaugen, Andreas Stenseth Storbråten, Renske Versloot, Inger Roug, Dave Newell

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Chiropractic & manual therapies, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. The CARL II cohort: what we did and what came out of it.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Halldór Fannar GíslasonReykjavik, Iceland.
Jari Kullervo SalminenTampere, Finland.
Linn SandhaugenOslo, Norway.
Andreas Stenseth StorbråtenOslo, Norway.
Renske VerslootWijchen, The Netherlands.
Inger RougAECC University College, Parkwood Road, Bournemouth, England, UK.
Dave NewellAECC University College, Parkwood Road, Bournemouth, England, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1462-3586

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The chiropractic profession both in the past and presently has diverse opinions concerning different health care approaches and the science or otherwise that underpins them. Previous research has reported that adherence to unorthodox descriptions of chiropractic were associated with types of practice behavior considered outside of acceptable evidence-based guidelines in Canada. However, this type of investigation has not been repeated in a European context and such relationships may be different. Methods: A survey was disseminated amongst European chiropractors during early 2017. Dissemination was through an on-line platform with links to the survey being sent to all European chiropractic associations regardless of European Chiropractors' Union (ECU) membership and additionally through the European Academy of Chiropractic (EAC). Social media via Facebook groups was also used to disseminate links to the survey. Results: One thousand three hundred twenty and two responses from chiropractors across Europe representing approximately 17.2% of the profession were collected. Five initial self-determined chiropractic identities were collapsed into 2 groups categorised as orthodox (79.9%) and unorthodox (20.1%). Analysis of responses to a range of questions stratified by such groups was carried out. When comparing the percentage of new patients chiropractors x-rayed, 23% of the unorthodox group x-rayed > 50% of their new patients compared to 5% in the orthodox group. Furthermore, the proportion of respondents reporting > 150 patient encounters per week in the unorthodox group were double compared to the orthodox (22 v 11%). Lastly the proportion of those respondents disagreeing or strongly disagreeing with the statement Conclusions: Despite limitations with generalisability in this survey, the proportion of respondents adhering to the different belief categories are remarkably similar to other studies exploring this phenomenon. In addition, and in parallel with other research, this survey suggests that key practice characteristics in contravention of national radiation guidelines or opposition to evidence based public health policy are significantly more associated with non-orthodox chiropractic paradigms.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAttitude of Health PersonnelChiropracticCross-Sectional StudiesCultureEuropeFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPhysiciansSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung AdultBeliefsChiropracticNon-orthodoxOrthodoxParadigmsPractice

Identifiers

PMID31007897
PMCPMC6456953

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.