ArticleBMJ open2022
Effectiveness of interventions for middle-aged and ageing population with neck pain: a systematic review and network meta-analysis protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionNeck pain (NP) is a common musculoskeletal complaint and is increasing in prevalence. Current clinical practice guidelines and systematic reviews recommended conservative, pharmacological and invasive interventions for individuals with NP. However, optimal management specifically for those who are middle-aged or older adults (≥45 years) is not available; and important considering our ageing population. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A systematic review with network meta-analysis (NMA) will be conducted following the Cochrane guidelines. Eligibility criteria include randomised controlled/clinical trials evaluating any of acute (<3 months) or chronic (≥3 months) non-specific NP, whiplash associated disorders, cervical radiculopathy and cervicogenic headache. Any interventions and outcome measures detailed within The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health domains will be included. Two independent reviewers will search key databases (AMED, CENTRAL, CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, PEDro and PsycINFO), grey literature, key journals and reference lists in May 2022. Two reviewers will decide eligibility and assess risk of bias (ROB) of included studies. The kappa statistic will be used to evaluate agreement between the reviewers at each stage. Data will be extracted by one reviewer and checked for accuracy by a second reviewer. Descriptive data and ROB will be summarised and tabulated. Traditional pairwise meta-analysis using random-effect model will be performed for all direct comparisons, and NMA using a frequentist random-effect model then performed based on NP classification where possible. A network of traditional pairwise meta-analysis allows comparisons of multiple interventions from both direct and indirect evidence to provide a hierarchal establishment for enhancing decision making of clinical practitioners. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethic approval is not required as the study is a literature review. The findings will be shared with the national and international researchers, healthcare professionals and the general public through publishing in a peer-reviewed journal and presentations at conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021284618.
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.