ArticleChiropractic & manual therapies2026
Association between spinal manipulative therapy and cervical artery dissection in patients with neck pain or headache: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in Chiropractic & manual therapies, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Association between spinal manipulative therapy and cervical artery dissection in patients with neck pain or headache: a retrospective cohort study.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2026Article
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
Abstract
objectivesCervical artery dissection (CeAD) has been proposed as a sequela of spinal manipulative therapy (SMT), however, protopathic bias arising from care-seeking for CeAD symptoms (e.g., neck pain/headache) may overestimate observed associations. Among adults experiencing new neck pain/headache, we tested the null hypothesis of no significant CeAD risk within 30 days following SMT compared to matched ibuprofen-prescribed controls.
methodsWe searched United States TriNetX Linked health records/claims data (2010-2025) for adults seeking care for new episodes of neck pain/headache receiving (1) chiropractor-administered cervical SMT or (2) outpatient visit with ibuprofen prescription, excluding those with previous cerebrovascular disease and/or CeAD, using propensity matching to minimize confounding. We examined the risk ratio (RR) of CeAD (primary outcome), exploring cumulative incidence, CeAD subtypes, absolute risk difference (RD), and negative control outcomes.
resultsAfter matching, there were 431,492 patients per cohort. In the SMT cohort, compared with the ibuprofen cohort, CeAD risk was lower while RD was minimal [95% CI] (RR = 0.53 [0.35, 0.83]; RD=-6.3 [-10.8, -2.0] events per 100,000 patients; P = 0.004). Carotid artery dissection risk was lower; vertebral artery dissection risk was not significantly different. Data quality supported balanced confounders and minimal follow-up loss (< 3%). Negative control outcomes were partially balanced.
conclusionsThis study found no evidence of an increased risk of CeAD after chiropractor-administered cervical SMT compared with ibuprofen prescription in adults seeking care for new episodes of neck pain or headache. Despite the rarity of these events, all clinicians, including chiropractors, should maintain vigilance for CeAD symptoms. Additional multidisciplinary research is warranted to further address potential confounding and examine patient subgroups (e.g., migraine) and stroke.
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.