SynthesisFrontiers in pediatrics2026
Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis non-surgical interventions: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of Cobb angle and SRS-22 outcomes.
Synthesis in Frontiers in pediatrics, 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
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is a common three-dimensional spinal deformity. Non-surgical interventions are important for controlling curve progression and maintaining quality of life, but their comparative effectiveness remains uncertain. Objective: To compare the effects of commonly used non-surgical interventions for AIS on Cobb angle and SRS-22 outcomes through a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Methods: PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and major Chinese databases were searched from inception to April 4, 2026. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing non-surgical interventions and reporting Cobb angle or SRS-22 were included for the primary network meta-analysis. Prospective non-randomized studies served as supplementary evidence. Effect sizes were expressed as standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Ranking was assessed using SUCRA, interpreted cautiously with heterogeneity and evidence sparsity. Results: Thirteen comparative studies (709 AIS subjects) were included (10 RCTs, 3 non-randomized). Interventions included Schroth training, bracing, scoliosis-specific exercises, core stabilization, and traditional Chinese medicine rehabilitation. Traditional pairwise meta-analysis showed a pooled SMD of -1.39 (95% CI: -2.20 to -0.59) with high heterogeneity (I Conclusion: Some non-surgical interventions may improve Cobb angle in AIS; bracing and Schroth-related therapies show a trend toward relative superiority for short-term Cobb angle control. However, due to sparse networks, high heterogeneity, and potential small-study effects, results should be interpreted cautiously and not solely based on SUCRA rankings. SRS-22 evidence remains insufficient. High-quality RCTs with longer follow-up are needed. Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO CRD42024546325.
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.