SynthesisSystematic reviews2023
Measures of neck muscle strength and their measurement properties in adults with chronic neck pain-a systematic review.
Synthesis in Systematic reviews, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06049316 (Comparative Effects of Scapular Stabilization Versus Scapular Functional Exercises on Chronic Neck Pain.), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
Comparative Effects of Scapular Stabilization Versus Scapular Functional Exercises on Chronic Neck Pain.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- An overview of systematic reviews investigating clinical features for diagnosing neck pain and its associated disorders.The Journal of manual & manipulative therapy · 2025Review
- The impact of neck pain and movement performance on the interarticular compressive force of the cervical spine: a cross-sectional study based on OpenSim.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMeasurement of neck muscle strength is common during the assessment of people with chronic neck pain (CNP). This systematic review evaluates the measurement properties (reliability, validity, and responsiveness) of neck muscle strength measures in people with CNP. DATABASES AND DATA TREATMENT: This systematic review followed a PROSPERO registered protocol (CRD42021233290). Electronic databases MEDLINE (OVID interface), CINAHL, SPORTDiscuss via (EBSCO interface), EMBASE (OVID interface), and Web of Science were searched from inception to 21 June 2021. Screening, data extraction, and quality assessment (Consensus-based Standards for the selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist) were conducted independently by two reviewers. The overall strength of evidence was evaluated using the modified Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation.
resultsFrom 794 records, nine articles were included in this review which concerned six different neck strength outcome measures. All studies evaluated reliability and one evaluated construct validity. The reliability of neck strength measures ranged from good to excellent. However, the risk of bias was rated as doubtful/inadequate for all except one study and the overall certainty of evidence was rated low/very low for all measures except for the measurement error of a handheld dynamometer.
conclusionA multitude of measures are used to evaluate neck muscle strength in people with CNP, but their measurement properties have not been fully established. Further methodologically rigorous research is required to increase the overall quality of evidence.
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.