The Effect of Spinal Manipulation on the Efficacy of a Rehabilitation Protocol for Patients With Chronic Neck Pain: A Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This pilot study sought to (1) determine whether a 4-week period of chiropractic care improved the ability of chronic neck pain patients to respond to an 8-week period of exercise rehabilitation and (2) determine effect sizes to use in sample size calculations for future studies. METHODS: Twenty male and female participants (age, 43 +/- 12 years; body mass index, 27 +/- 4.5 [mean +/- SD]) with chronic nonspecific neck pain were randomized into either a chiropractic care combined with exercise or an exercise only group. Group 1 received 4 weeks of chiropractic care, and group 2 waited 4 weeks before both groups participated in an 8-week exercise intervention. The following outcome measures were assessed in week 1 (baseline), week 4, and at week 12: Neck Disability Index (NDI); Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), both now and worst; neck flexion-relaxation response; and feed-forward activation (FFA) times. A repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to evaluate the changes in the NDI and VAS over time. Effect sizes were calculated for changes in neuromuscular parameters. RESULTS: There were significant decreases in the NDI score (P < .001) and VAS in (P < .005) in both groups with no significant differences between the groups. Effect sizes (ESs) were as follows: NDI (.293); VAS now (.175); VAS worst (.392); flexion-relaxation (.636); FFA times: sternocleidomastoid (.1321), anterior scalene (.195). This lead to sample size estimates as follows: flexion-relaxation response, 64 subjects per group; NDI, 145 subjects per group; VAS, 166 subjects per group. CONCLUSIONS: Chiropractic care combined with exercise and exercise alone are both effective at reducing functional disability and pain in chronic nonspecific neck pain patients. Future studies will need at least 64 subjects per group to determine if there are differences between the groups and if these differences are attributable to changes in neuromuscular measures.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".