MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099422110 · doi:10.2522/ptj.20140361

Effectiveness of Passive Physical Modalities for Shoulder Pain: Systematic Review by the Ontario Protocol for Traffic Injury Management Collaboration

2014· article· en· W2099422110 on OpenAlexaffabout
Hainan Yu, Pierre Côté, Heather M. Shearer, Jessica J. Wong, Deborah Sutton, Kristi Randhawa, Sharanya Varatharajan, Danielle Southerst, Silvano Mior, Arthur Ameis, Maja Stupar, Margareta Nordin, Gabreille M. van der Velde, Linda Carroll, Craig Jacobs, Anne Taylor‐Vaisey, Sean Abdulla, Yaadwinder Shergill

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Therapy · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicShoulder Injury and Treatment
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalInstitute for Work & HealthCentre for Disability Prevention and RehabilitationUniversity of AlbertaUniversité de MontréalOntario Tech UniversityCanadian Memorial Chiropractic College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePhysical therapyRandomized controlled trialMEDLINECINAHLPsycINFOModalitiesCochrane LibraryPopulationShoulder Impingement SyndromePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychological interventionSurgeryRotator cuff

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Shoulder pain is a common musculoskeletal condition in the general population. Passive physical modalities are commonly used to treat shoulder pain. However, previous systematic reviews reported conflicting results. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of passive physical modalities for the management of soft tissue injuries of the shoulder. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from January 1, 1990, to April 18, 2013. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort and case-control studies were eligible. Random pairs of independent reviewers screened 1,470 of 1,760 retrieved articles after removing 290 duplicates. Twenty-two articles were eligible for critical appraisal. Eligible studies were critically appraised using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network criteria. Of those, 11 studies had a low risk of bias. DATA EXTRACTION: The lead author extracted data from low risk of bias studies and built evidence tables. A second reviewer independently checked the extracted data. DATA SYNTHESIS: The findings of studies with a low risk of bias were synthesized according to principles of best evidence synthesis. Pretensioned tape, ultrasound, and interferential current were found to be noneffective for managing shoulder pain. However, diathermy and corticosteroid injections led to similar outcomes. Low-level laser therapy provided short-term pain reduction for subacromial impingement syndrome. Extracorporeal shock-wave therapy was not effective for subacromial impingement syndrome but provided benefits for persistent shoulder calcific tendinitis. LIMITATIONS: Non-English studies were excluded. CONCLUSIONS: Most passive physical modalities do not benefit patients with subacromial impingement syndrome. However, low-level laser therapy is more effective than placebo or ultrasound for subacromial impingement syndrome. Similarly, shock-wave therapy is more effective than sham therapy for persistent shoulder calcific tendinitis.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.684
Threshold uncertainty score0.491

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.340 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations34
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical TherapySame topicShoulder Injury and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207