Gap finder

Search review questions

Each row is one question a systematic review asked: who, what, compared with what, and which outcome, with the effect it found and how certain that is. Words match anywhere in the field.

Limit to evidence status or GRADE (optional)

767 questions in 53 reviews · Back and Neck

current versions
No studies 149 · 19.4%Ungraded 41 · 5.3%Very low 168 · 21.9%Low 226 · 29.5%Moderate 156 · 20.3%High 27 · 3.5%

Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.

QuestionEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Acute to Chronic MND: Scapulothoracic + UE Strengthening vs CONTROL
Function: DASH 20% no difficulty to 100% fully unable ( · patients with Acute to Chronic MND
Exercises for mechanical neck disorders (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted1 study · 163 participantsVery low
Acute to Chronic MND: Scapulothoracic + UE Strengthening vs CONTROL
Work ability index: 7 poor ability to 49 excellent ability treatment ( · patients with Acute to Chronic MND
Exercises for mechanical neck disorders (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted1 study · 88 participantsLow
Acute to Chronic MND: Scapulothoracic + UE Strengthening vs CONTROL
Adverse effects · patients with Acute to Chronic MND
Exercises for mechanical neck disorders (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Chronic MND: Cervical/UE Stretch/ROM Exercises + Cervical/Scapulothoracic+/‐UE Strengthening + Dynamic/Static Cervical Stabilization + ANOTHER INTERVENTION vs THAT SAME INTERVENTION
Adverse Effects · patients with mechanical neck disorders
Exercises for mechanical neck disorders (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted3 studies · 8 participantsUngraded
Chronic MND: Cervical Stretch/ROM Exercises + Cervical/Scapulothoracic Strengthening + Static/Dynamic Cervical/Shoulder Stabilization vs WAIT LIST
Pain Intensity: VAS 0 no pain to 100 worst pain; ( · patients with chronic mechanical neck disorders
Exercises for mechanical neck disorders (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted2 studies · 147 participantsModerate
Chronic MND: Cervical Stretch/ROM Exercises + Cervical/Scapulothoracic Strengthening + Static/Dynamic Cervical/Shoulder Stabilization vs WAIT LIST
Function: NPDI or NDI 0 no disability to 100 maximum disability; ( · patients with chronic mechanical neck disorders
Exercises for mechanical neck disorders (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted2 studies · 147 participantsModerate
Chronic MND: Cervical Stretch/ROM Exercises + Cervical/Scapulothoracic Strengthening + Static/Dynamic Cervical/Shoulder Stabilization vs WAIT LIST
Quality of Life: SF‐36 (physical component) · patients with chronic mechanical neck disorders
Exercises for mechanical neck disorders (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted2 studies · 143 participantsModerate
Brace vs observation (randomized controlled trial)
Quality of life PedsQL scores1 · adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis
Braces for idiopathic scoliosis in adolescents (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted1 study · 111 participantsVery low
Brace and exercise vs observation
Risk of success no progression over 50°, no fusion, no waiting list for fusion · adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis
Braces for idiopathic scoliosis in adolescents (2015) · Cochrane
RR 1.79 [1.04, 3.07]1 study · 57 participantsVery low
Brace and exercise vs observation
Any adverse event number of participants with at least 1 adverse event · adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis
Braces for idiopathic scoliosis in adolescents (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted0 studies · 0 participantsUngraded
Brace and exercise vs observation
Pulmonary disorders, disability, back pain, psychological issues, and cosmetic issues subjective or objective · adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis
Braces for idiopathic scoliosis in adolescents (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted0 studies · 0 participantsUngraded
Rigid vs elastic brace (randomized controlled trial)
Quality of life · adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis
Braces for idiopathic scoliosis in adolescents (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted0 studies · 0 participantsUngraded
Rigid vs elastic brace (randomized controlled trial)
Risk of success curves remaining below 50° · adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis
Braces for idiopathic scoliosis in adolescents (2015) · Cochrane
RR 1.4 [1.03, 1.89]1 study · 43 participantsLow
Rigid vs elastic brace (randomized controlled trial)
Any adverse event number of participants with at least 1 adverse event · adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis
Braces for idiopathic scoliosis in adolescents (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted0 studies · 0 participantsUngraded
Rigid vs elastic brace (randomized controlled trial)
Pulmonary disorders, disability, back pain, psychological issues, and cosmetic issues subjective or objective · adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis
Braces for idiopathic scoliosis in adolescents (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted0 studies · 0 participantsUngraded
Brace vs observation (randomized controlled trial)
Risk of success Curves remaining below 50° · adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis
Braces for idiopathic scoliosis in adolescents (2015) · Cochrane
RR 1.79 [1.29, 2.5]1 study · 116 participantsLow
Brace vs observation (randomized controlled trial)
Pulmonary disorders, disability, back pain, psychological issues, and cosmetic issues Subjective · adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis
Braces for idiopathic scoliosis in adolescents (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted0 studies · 0 participantsUngraded
Brace vs observation (randomized controlled trial)
Any adverse event Number of participants reporting at least 1 adverse event · adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis
Braces for idiopathic scoliosis in adolescents (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted0 studies · 0 participantsUngraded
Bracing vs observation (cohort studies)
Quality of life PedsQL score1 · adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis
Braces for idiopathic scoliosis in adolescents (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted1 study · 236 participantsVery low
Bracing vs observation (cohort studies)
Risk of success curves remaining below 50° · adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis
Braces for idiopathic scoliosis in adolescents (2015) · Cochrane
RR 1.5 [1.19, 1.89]1 study · 242 participantsVery low
Bracing vs observation (cohort studies)
Any adverse event number of participants with at least 1 adverse event · adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis
Braces for idiopathic scoliosis in adolescents (2015) · Cochrane
RR 1.27 [0.96, 1.67]1 study · 242 participantsVery low
Bracing vs observation (cohort studies)
Pulmonary disorders, disability, back pain, psychological issues, and cosmetic issues subjective or objective · adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis
Braces for idiopathic scoliosis in adolescents (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted0 studies · 0 participantsUngraded
Brace and exercise vs observation
Quality of life · adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis
Braces for idiopathic scoliosis in adolescents (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted0 studies · 0 participantsUngraded
Facet joint: radiofrequency denervation vs placebo
Pain 1 month post treatment (VAS 0 to 10)a · patients with chronic low back pain
Radiofrequency denervation for chronic low back pain (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted3 studies · 160 participantsModerate
Discs: radiofrequency denervation vs placebo
Pain 1 month post treatment (VAS 0 to 10) · patients with chronic low back pain
Radiofrequency denervation for chronic low back pain (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted1 study · 56 participantsLow
Discs: radiofrequency denervation vs placebo
Pain 1 to 6 months post treatment (VAS 0 to 10) · patients with chronic low back pain
Radiofrequency denervation for chronic low back pain (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted2 studies · 84 participantsLow
Discs: radiofrequency denervation vs placebo
Pain > 6 months post treatment (VAS 0 to 10) · patients with chronic low back pain
Radiofrequency denervation for chronic low back pain (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted2 studies · 75 participantsModerate
Discs: radiofrequency denervation vs placebo
Function 1 month post treatment (ODI 0 to 100) · patients with chronic low back pain
Radiofrequency denervation for chronic low back pain (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted1 study · 57 participantsLow
Discs: radiofrequency denervation vs placebo
Function 1 to 6 months post treatment (ODI 0 to 100) · patients with chronic low back pain
Radiofrequency denervation for chronic low back pain (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted2 studies · 85 participantsModerate
Discs: radiofrequency denervation vs placebo
Function > 6 months post treatment (ODI 0 to 100) · patients with chronic low back pain
Radiofrequency denervation for chronic low back pain (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted2 studies · 76 participantsModerate
SI joint: radiofrequency denervation vs placebo
Pain 1 month post treatment (VAS 0 to 10) · patients with chronic low back pain
Radiofrequency denervation for chronic low back pain (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted2 studies · 79 participantsVery low
SI joint: radiofrequency denervation vs placebo
Pain 1 to 6 months post treatment (VAS 0 to 10) · patients with chronic low back pain
Radiofrequency denervation for chronic low back pain (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted1 study · 51 participantsLow
SI joint: radiofrequency denervation vs placebo
Function 1 month post treatment (ODI 0 to 100) · patients with chronic low back pain
Radiofrequency denervation for chronic low back pain (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted2 studies · 75 participantsVery low
SI joint: radiofrequency denervation vs placebo
Function 1 to 6 months post treatment (ODI 0 to 100) · patients with chronic low back pain
Radiofrequency denervation for chronic low back pain (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted1 study · 49 participantsLow
Facet joint: radiofrequency denervation vs placebo
Pain 1 to 6 months post treatment (VAS 0 to 10)a · patients with chronic low back pain
Radiofrequency denervation for chronic low back pain (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted3 studies · 182 participantsLow
Facet joint: radiofrequency denervation vs placebo
Pain > 6 months post treatment (VAS 0 to 10) · patients with chronic low back pain
Radiofrequency denervation for chronic low back pain (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted3 studies · 140 participantsModerate
Facet joint: radiofrequency denervation vs placebo
Function 1 month post treatment (ODI 0 to 100) · patients with chronic low back pain
Radiofrequency denervation for chronic low back pain (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted1 study · 60 participantsLow
Facet joint: radiofrequency denervation vs placebo
Function > 6 months post treatment (ODI 0 to 100) · patients with chronic low back pain
Radiofrequency denervation for chronic low back pain (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted1 study · 60 participantsLow
Facet joint: radiofrequency denervation vs placebo
Complications · patients with chronic low back pain
Radiofrequency denervation for chronic low back pain (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted0 participantsUngraded
Facet joint: radiofrequency denervation vs steroid injections
Pain 1 month post treatment (VAS 0 to 10) · patients with chronic low back pain
Radiofrequency denervation for chronic low back pain (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted2 studies · 180 participantsLow
Facet joint: radiofrequency denervation vs steroid injections
Pain 6 months post treatment (VAS 0 to 10) · patients with chronic low back pain
Radiofrequency denervation for chronic low back pain (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted3 studies · 232 participantsVery low
Facet joint: radiofrequency denervation vs steroid injections
Pain 12 months post treatment (VAS 0 to 10) · patients with chronic low back pain
Radiofrequency denervation for chronic low back pain (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted2 studies · 180 participantsVery low
MET plus any intervention vs other therapies plus that intervention
Pain A 0 to 100 visual or numerical scale, where 0 equals no pain at all and 100 is the worst pain imaginable · patients with non‐specific low‐back pain (LBP)
Muscle energy technique for non‐specific low‐back pain (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted7 studies · 232 participantsLow
MET vs sham MET
CI: confidence interval · patients with non‐specific low‐back pain (LBP)
Muscle energy technique for non‐specific low‐back pain (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
MET vs all other therapies
Pain A 0 t o 100 visual or numerical scale, where 0 equals no pain at all and 100 is the worst pain imaginable · patients with non‐specific low‐back pain (LBP)
Muscle energy technique for non‐specific low‐back pain (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted2 studies · 88 participantsVery low
MET vs all other therapies
Functional status Oswestry; 100‐point scale where 0 equals no disability and 100 is seriously disabled. · patients with non‐specific low‐back pain (LBP)
Muscle energy technique for non‐specific low‐back pain (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted1 study · 60 participantsLow
MET vs all other therapies
General well‐being · patients with non‐specific low‐back pain (LBP)
Muscle energy technique for non‐specific low‐back pain (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
MET vs all other therapies
Adverse events · patients with non‐specific low‐back pain (LBP)
Muscle energy technique for non‐specific low‐back pain (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
MET vs all other therapies
CI: confidence interval · patients with non‐specific low‐back pain (LBP)
Muscle energy technique for non‐specific low‐back pain (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
MET vs all other therapies
Pain A 0 to 100 visual analogue scale, where 0 equals no pain at all and 100 is the worst pain imaginable · patients with non‐specific low‐back pain (LBP)
Muscle energy technique for non‐specific low‐back pain (2015) · Cochrane
no estimate extracted1 study · 30 participantsLow