Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31754460›Full record

ArticleArchives of physiotherapy2019

The "subluxation" issue: an analysis of chiropractic clinic websites.

Alessandro R Marcon, Blake Murdoch, Timothy Caulfield

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of physiotherapy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
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

3 authors.

Alessandro R MarconHealth Law Institute, Law Centre, University of Alberta, 91 University Campus, NW, Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2H5 Canada.
Blake MurdochHealth Law Institute, Law Centre, University of Alberta, 91 University Campus, NW, Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2H5 Canada.
Timothy CaulfieldHealth Law Institute, Law Centre, University of Alberta, 91 University Campus, NW, Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2H5 Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVertebral subluxation theories are controversial in chiropractic. Divisions are evident in the chiropractic community among those who align their practices to subluxation theories and those who do not. This study investigated how many clinics offering chiropractic in the Canadian province of Alberta promote a theory of subluxation, which health ailments or improvements were linked to subluxation, and whether the subluxation discourse was used to promote chiropractic for particular demographics.

methodsUsing the search engine on the Canadian Chiropractic Associations' website, we made a list of all clinics in Alberta. We then used Google searches to obtain a URL for each clinic with a website, totalling 324 URLs for 369 clinics. We then searched on each website for "subluxation" and performed content analysis on the related content.

resultsOne hundred twenty-one clinics' websites (33%) presented a theory of vertebral subluxation. The health ailments and improvements discussed in relation to subluxation were wide-ranging. An observed trend was the marketing of chiropractic for children, which was observed on 29 clinic websites (8%).

conclusionsBased on the controversy surrounding vertebral subluxation, the substantial number of clinic websites aligning their practice with vertebral subluxation should cause concern for regulatory bodies.

Indexed as

ChiropracticMarketingRegulationSubluxationWebsites

Identifiers

PMID31754460
PMCPMC6854675

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.