ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Clinical outcomes associated with adding pelvic correction manipulation to adjacent needling for lumbar disc herniation: a prospective comparative cohort study.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Lumbar disc herniation (LDH) commonly causes persistent pain, disability, and recurrence despite conservative care. Whether pelvic correction manipulation adds durable benefit to adjacent needling remains uncertain. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the association of adding pelvic correction manipulation to adjacent needling with disability, pain, and recurrence in LDH. Methods: This single-center prospective comparative cohort study with retrospective long-term outcome ascertainment enrolled consecutive adults with symptomatic, imaging-confirmed LDH in Wuxi, China, from December 2019 to December 2020. Patients received adjacent needling plus pelvic correction manipulation or adjacent needling alone according to clinician-patient choice. The primary outcome was change in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) at treatment completion. Secondary outcomes included pain, Japanese Orthopedic Association score, ODI response, recurrence, and adverse events through 24 months. Baseline-adjusted mixed-effects models, propensity-score overlap weighting, multiple imputation, and sensitivity analyses were used. Results: Among 208 patients, 106 received combined therapy and 102 adjacent needling alone. Combined therapy was associated with greater ODI reduction at treatment completion (adjusted difference, -3.40 points; 95% CI, -5.40 to -1.40; Conclusion: Adding pelvic correction manipulation was associated with modestly better long-term disability outcomes and lower recurrence, but randomized trials are needed to confirm causality. Because treatment was not randomized, these findings should be read as associations rather than proof of a causal effect, and unmeasured confounding cannot be excluded.
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.