Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31019425›Full record

ArticleJournal of chiropractic humanities2018

The Chiropractic Vertebral Subluxation Part 9: Complexes, Models, and Consensus From 1979 to 1995.

Simon A Senzon

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
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

1 author.

Simon A SenzonSchool of Health and Human Sciences, Southern Cross University, Lismore, New South Wales, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

ChiropracticHistory

Identifiers

PMID31019425
PMCPMC6472115

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.