Is chronic neck pain related to scapular dyskinesia? A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: research indicates that individuals with chronic neck pain often exhibit scapular dyskinesia, leading to negative effects on pain intensity, posture, and muscle activation pattern, However, the role of scapular dyskinesia in mechanical neck pain remains enigmatic. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relevance between chronic neck pain and scapular dyskinesia. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was conducted using the adapted Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS). Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus and Google Scholar, and the grey literature were searched from inception to June 2024. GRADE criteria were used to evaluate the overall quality and strength of evidence. RESULTS: 19 articles (3 case control; 16 cross-sectional studies, total sample = 1365) were included. Based on the NOS, of the 19 studies examined, 14 (73%) were found to have a moderate risk of bias, 3 study (15%) had a low risk and 2 study (10%) had a high risk of bias. Studies have shown that there is a relationship between chronic neck pain and scapular dyskinesia, indicating that individuals with chronic neck pain exhibit a higher prevalence of scapular dyskinesis compared to those without such symptoms. However, the quality and strength of the evidence was very low according to the GRADE criteria. CONCLUSIONS: The study implies that physical therapy practices should consider assessing and addressing scapular kinematics in patients with neck pain, as scapular dysfunction may contribute to their symptoms. Understanding the relationship between neck pain and scapular mechanics may inform more effective treatment strategies and individualized care plans. However, the overall quality of the evidence was low. More longitudinal cohort studies are needed. Future studies should investigate the causal relationship between chronic neck pain and scapular dyskinesia. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42024554365.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".