ReviewBrain & spine2025
Exercise, manipulation and traction physiotherapy in the conservative management of lumbar disc herniation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Brain & spine, 2025. 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.
- Rehabilitation modalities in ankylosing spondylitis: orthopaedic perspectives on function, bone health, and surgical safety.Journal of orthopaedics · 2026Review
- Manual Therapy, Core Training, and Pilates Method Interventions in Dance Rehabilitation: A Scoping Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- The Effect of Nurse-Led Transitional Care on Rehabilitation Outcomes in Patients With Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Nursing research and practice · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Lumbar disc herniation (LDH) is a leading cause of global back pain with significant socioeconomic impact. Conservative physiotherapy, including exercise, manipulation, and traction therapies, is a common first-line treatment. However, their relative efficacy and applicability to specific subgroups remain unclear. Research question: This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy of these three modalities, identified factors influencing variability, and explored subgroup-specific applications. Material and methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review was conducted with searches of PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, OVID, Scopus, and grey literature. Forty-three studies were included in the qualitative synthesis and 20 in the meta-analysis. Random-effects models estimated pooled standardized mean changes (SMCs), and meta-regression examined covariates influencing variability. Results: The pooled SMC across modalities was 2.28 (95 % CI: 1.51, 3.05), indicating large treatment effects, though heterogeneity was high (I Discussion and conclusion: Conservative therapies may effectively reduce LDH-related pain and disability, with traction therapy demonstrating the largest pooled effect size. High heterogeneity and methodological inconsistencies limit subgroup-specific recommendations. Rigorous trials and standardized methodologies are essential for optimizing evidence-based care for LDH patients.
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.