Manipulation (cervical) vs oral medicine: Acute and subacute neck pain Long‐term
Manipulation (cervical) showed no clear difference in acute and subacute neck pain Long‐term compared with oral medicine (moderate certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Manipulation (cervical) vs oral medicine Acute and subacute neck pain Long‐term · patients with acute and subacute neck pain Manipulation (cervical) showed no clear difference in acute and subacute neck pain Long‐term compared with oral medicine (moderate certainty). Manipulation and mobilisation for neck pain contrasted against an inactive control or another active treatment (2015) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 181 participants | Moderate |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Manipulation and mobilisation for neck pain contrasted against an inactive control or another active treatment 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.