SynthesisBMJ open2024
Efficacy of acupuncture for whiplash injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cochrane reviews of acupuncture are dated, do not account for the specific effects of sham controls and likely underestimate the efficacy of acupuncture therapy.Integrative medicine research · 2025Review
- Effectiveness of Acupuncture for Neck Pain: Systematic Review and Meta‑analysis with Trial Sequential Analysis.Journal of pain research · 2025Review
- Effects of Kinesio Taping on Neck Pain: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.Pain and therapy · 2024Review
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to establish clinical evidence for acupuncture by analysing data from trials that demonstrated the efficacy of acupuncture for whiplash-associated disorder (WAD) with the following research question: Is acupuncture treatment effective for symptom alleviation in patients with WAD compared with other usual care?
designA systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Ovid Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, ScienceOn, KMBASE, Korean Studies Information Service System, Korea Med, Oriental Medicine Advanced Searching Integrated System and Research Information Sharing Service were searched from their inception to 1 October 2023. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) using acupuncture on patients with WAD. The outcomes were the pain visual analogue scale (VAS) score or numerical rating scale score for neck pain, the range of motion (ROM) of the neck, the Neck Disability Index and safety. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent researchers analysed and extracted data from the selected literatures. The risk of bias and the quality of evidence were assessed according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation method, respectively.
resultsA total of 525 patients with WAD from eight RCTs were included in this study. The meta-analysis revealed that the outcomes showed significant differences in the pain VAS score (standard mean difference (SMD): -0.57 (-0.86 to -0.28), p<0.001) and ROM-extension (SMD: 0.47 (0.05 to 0.89), p=0.03). The risk of bias assessment revealed that four studies published after 2012 (50%, 4 out of 8 studies) showed low bias in most domains. The pain VAS score was graded as having moderate certainty.
conclusionAcupuncture may have clinical value in pain reduction and increasing the ROM for patients with WAD. High-quality RCTs must be conducted to confirm the efficacy of acupuncture in patients with WAD. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42021261595.
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.