Observational studyBMC medical education2026
From mannequins to humans - are manual therapy motor skills transferable? A mixed-methods study.
Observational study in BMC medical education, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundManual therapy, including spinal manipulative therapy (SMT), is a core component of chiropractic education. Simulation tools such as the Human Analogue Mannequin (HAM®) have been developed and coupled with force-sensing technology to support safe and structured training of SMT force-time characteristics. However, it remains unclear whether motor skills acquired using these tools are transferable to real-world scenarios.
methodsThis sequential explanatory mixed-methods observational study investigated whether chiropractic students, proficient at applying a set of pre-specified SMT force-time characteristics to the HAM®, could replicate those same characteristics in humans. Quantitative data measured SMT force-time characteristics (preload force, peak impulse force, time to peak impulse force) applied on the HAM®. Participants meeting the predefined force-time criteria in 4 out of 5 trials proceeded to apply SMTs to a human. Qualitative data from a survey with open-ended questions explored participants’ perceptions of their ability to replicate the SMT and differences between the HAM® and humans.
resultsNinety-five students participated (56% female, median age: 25 years), and 50 (53%) met the criteria on the HAM®. Thirty-seven (74%) of the participants who met the criteria on the HAM® also met the criteria on humans. No significant differences in participant characteristics were found between those who met or did not meet the criteria when applying SMT on humans. Participants who did not meet SMT force-time criteria on either the HAM® or humans often under-applied preload force. Time to peak impulse force criteria was usually met across all trials. Qualitatively, participants perceived that internal factors (e.g., previous experience, emotions, tactile feel) and differences between the HAM® and humans (e.g., stiffness, breathing) influenced their ability to replicate the SMT force-time criteria on humans.
conclusionMost students who successfully applied SMT force-time characteristics on a mannequin were able to replicate them on humans. Not meeting the SMT proficiency criteria (particularly in preload force) and the influence of non-biomechanical factors highlights the complexity of manual therapy motor skill 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.