ReviewClinics and practice2024
How to Evaluate the Efficacy of Manipulations in Spine Disorders-A Comprehensive Review of New and Traditional Outcome Measures.
Review in Clinics and practice, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ultrasound-guided selective nerve root blocks and caudal epidural injection in the management of lumbar radicular syndrome: a case series with one-year follow-up.Journal of ultrasound · 2026Article
- Ultrasound-guided infiltration of the posterior femoral cutaneous nerve: a technical approach for neuropathic pain management.Journal of ultrasound · 2025Article
- Review
- Association Between Spinal Manipulation, Butalbital Prescription, and Medication Overuse Headache in Adults With Tension-Type Headache: Retrospective Cohort Study.Health science reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Spine pain (SP) is the most common musculoskeletal disorder that causes transitional forms of motor disability. Considering its affordability and safety, manipulative therapy (MT) stands as one of the primary therapeutic approaches for SP and the related dysfunctional consequences. However, it is still difficult to assess and quantify the results of this treatment since there is a lack of objective evaluation tools in the available scientific literature. Thus, the purpose of this comprehensive review is to summarize the main outcomes used to evaluate the effectiveness of spine manipulations, focusing on their strengths and weaknesses. An extensive review of the PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases was performed to identify the literature of the last ten years regarding MT and the related assessment tools. A total of 12 studies met the inclusion criteria. The analyzed literature indicates that a wide range of outcome measures have been used to assess the effectiveness of spine MT. Pain is the main aspect to be investigated but it remains difficult to elucidate since it is strongly linked to various dimensions such as self-perception and psychological aspects. Therefore, it seems necessary to include new tools for evaluating the effects of spine MT, with the aim of exploiting new technologies and taking into consideration the SP biomechanical and biopsychosocial aspects.
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.