ArticleThe Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association2026
Efficacy of spinal manipulative therapy in older adults with chronic spinal conditions: an updated systematic review.
Article in The Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This systematic review evaluated the efficacy of SMT for chronic spinal conditions in adults aged 55 years and older. Methods: We searched multiple databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on SMT for older adults with chronic spinal conditions (≥ 12 weeks) published from February 2016 through October 2024. Additionally, studies from the prior article being updated were included as appropriate. Eligible studies compared SMT to active or inert comparators, measuring pain, function, or quality of life. Results: Nine reports were included, evaluating SMT for chronic low back pain (5 RCTs, n=544), chronic neck pain (2 RCTs, n=241), lumbar spinal stenosis (1 RCT, n=259), and combined neck/back disability (1 RCT, n=182). Conclusion: SMT may offer comparable or modestly greater benefit than other treatments for chronic spinal conditions in older adults, particularly for neck pain and LSS. Evidence certainty remains very low to moderate. Registration: PROSPERO (CDR42024615084).
Indexed as
Identifiers
42238484PMC13229143What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.