ArticleJournal of chiropractic humanities2018
The Chiropractic Vertebral Subluxation Part 9: Complexes, Models, and Consensus From 1979 to 1995.
Article in Journal of chiropractic humanities, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Article
- Doing the Same Thing and Expecting a Different Outcome: It Is Time for a Questioning Philosophy and Theory-Driven Chiropractic Research.Journal of chiropractic humanities · 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe purpose of this paper is to review and discuss the history of chiropractic vertebral subluxation (CVS) between 1979 and 1995, with an emphasis on complexes, models, and consensus. DISCUSSION: New models were developed and critiqued during this period. The first subluxation complex model was proposed by Faye. Other theorists such as Lantz and Dishman built upon his model. The complex models were integrated into consensus statements by the International Chiropractic Association and the American Chiropractic Association, and later by profession-wide processes. The plurality of the CVS encompassed known theories and included integration of stress models and biochemistry. The professional consensus around CVS was comprehensive as shown by the process models that included stakeholders in the profession. Calls for more empirical research and changes to terminology increased during this era. Influential articles from this period potentially contained errors and relied on older studies that may no longer be valid.
conclusionThe challenges to researching this complex entity during that time were daunting for many and pointed to challenges of using the word "subluxation" to encompass the multiplicity that defined CVS.
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.