MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effect of stabilization exercise on back pain, disability and quality of life in adults with scoliosis: a systematic review

2018· review· en· W2891368497 on OpenAlexaff
Malik Alanazi, Éric Parent, Elizabeth Dennett

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicScoliosis diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsMacEwan UniversityUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePhysical therapyScoliosisBlindingMEDLINECINAHLQuality of life (healthcare)PopulationRandomized controlled trialBack painPlaceboPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychological interventionAlternative medicineSurgeryPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Adult scoliosis (AS) is the most common spine deformity in adults. Back pain is the main symptom leading patients to seek medical consultation. Stabilization exercise has been shown effective for reducing back pain. No literature review has examined the effects of such exercises in adults with scoliosis. The objective was to systematically review the effects of stabilization exercises on back pain, disability and quality of life in adults with scoliosis. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We systematically searched the following databases from inception to March 2017: Medline, CINAHL, Embase, SportDiscus and Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials. Selection criteria included: controlled clinical trials that compare core stabilization exercise to placebo, no treatment or another treatment in participants diagnosed with AS over 18 years old. Studies with participants presenting torso or lower extremity surgery, injection in the last six months, comorbidity that could affect the spine, red flags signs or with a history of spine trauma were excluded. We extracted information about participants, treatments, and results on pain, function and quality of life. We appraised quality using Cochrane risk of bias. We formulated level of evidence summary statements using a priori rules based on quality and consistency of results. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: We found 630 unique articles and screened the full-text of 98 articles retrieved. Only one article met all selection criteria and was included in this review. Studies were mainly excluded for study design and patient population. The included study presented a low risk of bias for all criteria except for blinding and reporting if the timing of assessments was similar between groups. The literature provides limited evidence from one study with high risk of bias that stabilization exercises in the form of 20 weeks of active self-correction, task-oriented exercises and cognitive-behavioral therapy significantly improves pain, disability and quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the high prevalence of AS, there is an important gap in the literature with limited evidence reporting the effect of exercise on back pain in adults with scoliosis. This review suggest further experimental research is needed and formulates research recommendations.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.139
Threshold uncertainty score0.905

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.319 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations32
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation MedicineSame topicScoliosis diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207