ArticleBMJ open2026
Outcome measures used in the conservative management of people with non-specific thoracic spine pain (NTSP): a scoping review protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
introductionNon-specific thoracic spine pain (NTSP) is an under-recognised musculoskeletal condition associated with functional limitations, reduced quality of life and significant healthcare utilisation. Conservative management, including manual therapy, exercise and education, is widely used across physiotherapy, osteopathy and chiropractic practice. However, outcome measures used in NTSP research remain heterogeneous and inconsistently defined, limiting evidence synthesis and hindering progress toward developing a core outcome set (COS). This scoping review aims to systematically map the outcome measures reported in studies evaluating conservative care for adults with non-specific TSP, thereby identifying key outcome domains to inform future COS development. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This review will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews and is registered on the Open Science Framework. Five electronic databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, AMED) will be searched from July 2005 to July 2025, supplemented by searches of PROSPERO and Google Scholar. Eligible studies will include adults (≥18 years) receiving conservative care for TSP in non-hospital settings, reporting at least one outcome measure, and published in English. Study selection will involve two independent reviewers using Covidence, with data extracted using an iterative extraction tool. Findings will be synthesised narratively and presented in tables, with a preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses flow diagram used to report study selection. No quality appraisal will be undertaken, consistent with scoping review guidance. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required as this review uses published data. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication, conference presentations and engagement with a patient and public involvement and engagement group to support relevance and translation into future COS development.
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.