Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40312450›Full record

SynthesisSystematic reviews2025

Efficacy and safety of spinal manipulative therapy in the management of acute neck pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Yingxiu Diao, Yifang Liu, Jiaxin Pan, Junming Chen, Jiahui Pan, Manxia Liao, Hao Liu, Linrong Liao

Registry-linked trialAbstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Systematic reviews, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07619586 (Effects of Lumbar Spinal Manipulation on Balance and Fall Risk in Patients With Chronic Stroke), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT07619586 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Effects of Lumbar Spinal Manipulation on Balance and Fall Risk in Patients With Chronic Stroke: A Randomized Crossover Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorBitlis Eren UniversityRan2026 to 2026Enrolled52ConditionsStrokeArmsLumbar Spinal Manipulation, Placebo Lumbar Spinal Manipulation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Yingxiu Diao *Rehabilitation Medicine Center, The First Dongguan Affiliated Hospital, Guangdong Medical University, Dongguan, Guangdong, China.
Yifang Liu *Rehabilitation Medicine Center, The First Dongguan Affiliated Hospital, Guangdong Medical University, Dongguan, Guangdong, China.
Jiaxin PanRehabilitation Medicine Center, The First Dongguan Affiliated Hospital, Guangdong Medical University, Dongguan, Guangdong, China.
Junming ChenRehabilitation Medicine Center, The First Dongguan Affiliated Hospital, Guangdong Medical University, Dongguan, Guangdong, China.
Jiahui PanRehabilitation Medicine Center, The First Dongguan Affiliated Hospital, Guangdong Medical University, Dongguan, Guangdong, China.
Manxia LiaoDepartment of Rehabilitation, Yixing JORU Rehabilitation Hospital, Wuxi, Jiangsu, China.
Hao LiuSchool of Rehabilitation Medicine, Shandong Second Medical University, Weifang, Shandong, China.
Linrong LiaoRehabilitation Medicine Center, The First Dongguan Affiliated Hospital, Guangdong Medical University, Dongguan, Guangdong, China. lr-liao@126.com.

Funding

the Dongguan Science and Technology of Social Development Program 20221800905692the Talent Development Foundation of the Dongguan First Affiliated Hospital of Guangdong Medical University GCC2022004
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSpinal manipulative therapy (SMT) is frequently used to manage neck pain; however, its efficacy and safety in treating acute neck pain (ANP) remain uncertain and require further investigation.

objectivesThis study aims to comprehensively evaluate the efficacy and safety of SMT in the treatment of ANP. DATABASES AND DATA TREATMENT: A thorough search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, PEDro, and Cochrane Library databases, covering all studies from inception to March 20, 2023. Mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to assess outcomes such as pain intensity, cervical range of motion (CROM), and disability. The PEDro Scale and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach were utilized to evaluate the methodological quality and strength of evidence.

resultsEight randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 965 patients were included. Their PEDro scores ranged from 4-9 (mean: 6.38, SD: 1.25). Forest plot analysis showed SMT was better than the control in reducing pain (MD = -1.53, 95% CI [-2.22, -0.83]) and improving CROM in all measured aspects. It also significantly reduced disability scores (MD = -6.20, 95% CI [-9.81, -2.59]). No serious adverse events were reported.

conclusionsThe evidence supports the use of SMT as an effective and safe intervention for reducing pain, improving CROM, and decreasing disability in patients with ANP. These findings provide valuable insights for clinical practitioners and highlight the potential of SMT as a viable therapeutic option in managing ANP. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42021264411.

Indexed as

Acute PainManipulation, SpinalNeck PainHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRange of Motion, ArticularTreatment OutcomeAcute neck painMeta-analysisMusculoskeletal rehabilitationSpinal manipulative therapySystematic review

Identifiers

PMID40312450
PMCPMC12044948

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.