Trial reportJMIR research protocols2026
Comparison of Traditional Chinese Manual Therapy (Tuina) and Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy in Patients With Nonspecific Neck Pain: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report in JMIR research protocols, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Nonspecific neck pain (NNP) is a highly prevalent musculoskeletal condition worldwide, yet optimal noninvasive treatments remain to be established. Tuina and extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) are both commonly used in clinical practice, but comparative evidence is limited. Objective: This study aims to compare the clinical efficacy of Tuina versus ESWT in patients with NNP. Methods: In this randomized, controlled, single-blind trial, 58 patients with NNP will be allocated in a 1:1 ratio into 2 groups: Tuina therapy and ESWT. The Tuina group will receive 30-minute sessions 3 times per week for 4 weeks (12 sessions total). The ESWT group will receive interventions on days 1, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, and 30 (7 sessions total). The primary outcome measure will be pain intensity measured by the visual analog scale. Secondary outcome measures will include the Neck Disability Index, cervical active range of motion, shear wave elastography (SWE) using musculoskeletal ultrasound, and serum inflammatory factors. All outcome measures will be assessed at baseline, during treatment (2 and 4 wk), and at the 8-week follow-up, except for SWE and inflammatory factors. SWE will be measured at baseline, 4 weeks, and 8-week follow-up; inflammatory factors will be measured at baseline and 4 weeks. Results: Recruitment began on January 4, 2026, and is expected to be completed by August 2026. As of March 30, 2026, of the planned 58 participants, 26 had been enrolled. Data collection, including follow-up, is projected to finish by October 2026. Data analysis will commence after data collection is completed, and the results are anticipated to be submitted for publication in early 2027. Conclusions: This trial will provide direct comparative evidence to determine whether Tuina is superior to ESWT for reducing pain and disability in NNP, thereby informing evidence-based clinical decisions. Key design limitations include the inability to blind participants, which we mitigated by using blinded outcome assessors and rigorous allocation concealment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.