MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7117078424

The pathophysiologic mechanisms of spinal manipulative therapy in the management of chronic musculoskeletal pain.

2025· article· en· W7117078424 on OpenAlexaff
Olja Važić, Nicholas Thomas Antony, Jonathan Murray, B. A. Murphy, John Srbely

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech UniversityUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChiropracticManual therapySpinal manipulationAlternative medicineMEDLINERandomized controlled trialPathophysiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chronic musculoskeletal (MSK) pain is a leading cause of disability affecting patients and healthcare systems worldwide. Its burden is expected to rise sharply due to the aging global population. Given that chronic MSK pain is the most common condition treated by chiropractors daily, chiropractic is ideally positioned to assume a unique leadership role in the future health delivery system of managing this growing clinical challenge. Central sensitization (CS) is linked to an increasing number of chronic pain conditions characterized by increased sensory, sympathetic, and motor excitability. Accumulating evidence suggests that spinal manipulation may achieve its therapeutic benefits by modulating CS, thereby making it a potentially effective non-invasive approach to treating and managing chronic MSK pain. This review aims to provide a discussion of some of the scientific foundations underpinning the pathophysiologic mechanisms of chronic MSK pain and spinal manipulative therapy, as they relate to the contemporary neurophysiologic paradigm of chiropractic medicine and practice. Author’s Note: This paper is one of seven in a series exploring contemporary perspectives on the application of the evidence-based framework in chiropractic care. The Evidence Based Chiropractic Care (EBCC) initiative aims to support chiropractors in their delivery of optimal patient-centred care. We encourage readers to review all papers in the series.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation→French-language works237,207→