Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33849727›Full record

ArticleJournal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics2021

Temporal Trends and Geographic Variations in the Supply of Clinicians Who Provide Spinal Manipulation to Medicare Beneficiaries: A Serial Cross-Sectional Study.

James M Whedon, Scott Haldeman, Curtis L Petersen, William Schoellkopf, Todd A MacKenzie, Jon D Lurie

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Patterns of initial treatment and subsequent care escalation among medicare beneficiaries with neck pain: a retrospective cohort study.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Observational
  19. Clinical Effectiveness and Efficacy of Chiropractic Spinal Manipulation for Spine Pain.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2021
    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

6 authors.

James M WhedonHealth Services Research, Southern California University of Health Sciences, Whittier, California. Electronic address: jameswhedon@scuhs.edu.
Scott HaldemanHealth Services Research, Southern California University of Health Sciences, Whittier, California.
Curtis L PetersenThe Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire.
William SchoellkopfNorthern Light Health, Portland, Maine.
Todd A MacKenzieThe Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire.
Jon D LurieThe Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire.

Funding

Association between cervical spinal manipulation and cervical artery dissection in older and younger Medicare populationsR01AT009720 · NCCIH · DARTMOUTH COLLEGE · PI LURIE, JON D, MACKENZIE, TODD A. · 2018 to 2020
$1.6M
NCCIH NIH HHS R01 AT009720
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveSpinal manipulation (SM) is recommended for first-line treatment of patients with low back pain. Inadequate access to SM may result in inequitable spine care for older US adults, but the supply of clinicians who provide SM under Medicare is uncertain. The purpose of this study was to measure temporal trends and geographic variations in the supply of clinicians who provide SM to Medicare beneficiaries.

methodsMedicare is a US government-administered health insurance program that provides coverage primarily for older adults and people with disabilities. We used a serial cross-sectional design to examine Medicare administrative data from 2007 to 2015 for SM services identified by procedure code. We identified unique providers by National Provider Identifier and distinguished between chiropractors and other specialties by Physician Specialty Code. We calculated supply as the number of providers per 100 000 beneficiaries, stratified by geographic location and year.

resultsOf all clinicians who provide SM to Medicare beneficiaries, 97% to 98% are doctors of chiropractic. The geographic supply of doctors of chiropractic providing SM services in 2015 ranged from 20/100 000 in the District of Columbia to 260/100 000 in North Dakota. The supply of other specialists performing the same services ranged from fewer than 1/100 000 in 11 states to 8/100 000 in Colorado. Nationally, the number of Medicare-active chiropractors declined from 47 102 in 2007 to 45 543 in 2015. The count of other clinicians providing SM rose from 700 in 2007 to 1441 in 2015.

conclusionChiropractors constitute the vast majority of clinicians who bill for SM services to Medicare beneficiaries. The supply of Medicare-active SM providers varies widely by state. The overall supply of SM providers under Medicare is declining, while the supply of nonchiropractors who provide SM is growing.

Indexed as

AgedChiropracticCross-Sectional StudiesHumansLow Back PainMaleManipulation, ChiropracticManipulation, SpinalMedicareUnited StatesChiropracticManipulation, SpinalMedicareMusculoskeletal Manipulations

Identifiers

PMID33849727
PMCPMC10695632

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.