ArticleBiomolecules & biomedicine2025
Nutrition interventions for spine-related pain: A scoping review.
Article in Biomolecules & biomedicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Multiple studies have been published regarding various nutritional supplements or interventions to improve chronic pain. However, many of these studies emphasized widespread pain and were not specific to the spine. Therefore, the primary objective of this scoping review was to evaluate available evidence related to nutritional supplementation or dietary strategies for spine-related pain. A comprehensive literature search was performed on October 11, 2022, and updated on May 2, 2024. Databases included: MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science. Results were limited to those published within the past 10 years, to English-language articles, and excluded animal studies. Of the 2,081 screened articles, 29 were included in the final review. Of these, 26 focused on the low back, one on the neck, and two referred to generalized "back" pain. The largest number of studies were found on vitamins D and B, specifically for low back pain. However, there were conflicting findings for both vitamins; therefore, further research is necessary before these can be confidently recommended to patients suffering from low back pain. Furthermore, this scoping review identified a lack of consistency in study design, population or sample size, and outcome measures among currently published studies with a primary focus on nutritional supplementation or dietary strategies for spine-related pain.
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.