ArticleThe Journal of manual & manipulative therapy2025
Part I: examining the broken history of manual therapy across professions. A survey-based analysis.
Article in The Journal of manual & manipulative therapy, 2025. 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.
- Exploring the personal and professional outcomes of pursuing fellowship training in orthopedic manual physical therapy: a mixed-methods analysis.The Journal of manual & manipulative therapy · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The historical development of manual therapy is an area of ongoing debate impacting clinical practice, education, and practice regulations. Primary professions utilizing manual therapy include chiropractic, manual medicine, osteopathy, and physiotherapy. A survey was developed to explore perceptions, experiences, and opinions across professions, and was disseminated globally. It was completed by 194 individuals. Results demonstrated this topic is of significance with over 80% reporting that knowledge of historical development informs professional identity. Of the respondents, 64% had over 20 years professional experience. Student participation was low (<1%). Over 95% acknowledged an ancient basis for manual therapy, with 67% emphasizing bonesetter contributions. North America was reported as the primary area for the development of modern manual therapies by all except physiotherapy, which identified Northern Europe. Osteopathy's impact on current practice was recognized, though each profession ranked its own impact highest. Of respondents, 85% agreed there was conflict between professions over history. Thematic elements identified a shift for respondents from their initial education to a more nuanced understanding of the history over time, and an appreciation that there is not one profession that owns or developed manual therapy. Practice limitations were identified, as 19% of respondents reported limitations due to inaccurate historical understanding. This study highlights a lack of historical knowledge and its potential benefits for practice, education, regulation and interprofessional relations if recaptured. (
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.