Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34120641›Full record

ReviewEuropean journal of medical research2021

Network meta-analysis of short-term effects of different strategies in the conservative treatment of AIS.

Kepeng Li, Jun Miao, Jingan Zhang

Open access · goldAbstract readReviewNetwork Meta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Review in European journal of medical research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kepeng LiSecond Central Hospital of Baoding, 57 Fan Yang Middle Road, Zhuozhou, Baoding, Hebei, China.
Jun MiaoTianjin Hospital, 406 Jiefang South Road, Hexi District, Tianjin, China. likepeng19801@163.com.
Jingan ZhangTianjin Hospital, 406 Jiefang South Road, Hexi District, Tianjin, China.
Tianjin Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo evaluate the short-term effects of different conservative treatments on in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

methodsBy searching the relevant literature of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis, the curative effects of the three regimens of bracing therapy combined with scoliosis-specific exercises, simple treatment with brace and simple scoliosis-specific exercises were compared. Review manager 5.3, Stata MP16 and Network software packages were used for Reticular Meta-analysis of Cobb's angles before and after treatment.

resultsA total of 364 patients were included in four clinical studies. Reticular meta-analysis showed that the short-term effect of bracing treatment combined with scoliosis-specific exercises was better than that of treatment with brace and scoliosis-specific exercises, with effects of 2.71(95% CI 0.83-4.58) and 3.67(95% CI 1.21-6.14), respectively. There was no statistical difference between simple bracing therapy and scoliosis-specific exercises.

conclusionAmong the three common conservative treatments of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis, the short-term effect of bracing treatment combined with scoliosis-specific exercises is better than that of bracing treatment or scoliosis-specific exercises.

Indexed as

Practice Guidelines as TopicClinical Decision-MakingConservative TreatmentHumansScoliosisAdolescent idiopathic scoliosisBraceScoliosis-specific exercises

Identifiers

PMID34120641
PMCPMC8201698
OpenAlexW3170481858

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.