The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Manipulation and Mobilization of the Cervical Spine: A Systematic Review of the Literature
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Cervical spine manipulation and mobilization were reviewed in an analysis of the literature from 1966 to the present. OBJECTIVES: To assess the evidence for the efficacy and complications of cervical spine manipulation and mobilization for the treatment of neck pain and headache. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Although recent research has demonstrated the efficacy of spinal manipulation for some patients with low back pain, little is known about its efficacy for neck pain and headache. METHODS: A structured search of four computerized bibliographic data bases was performed to identify articles on the efficacy and complications of cervical spine manual therapy. Data were summarized, and randomized controlled trials were critically appraised for study quality. The confidence profile method of meta-analysis was used to estimate the effect of spinal manipulation on patients' pain status. RESULTS: Two of three randomized controlled trials showed a short-term benefit for cervical mobilization for acute neck pain. The combination of three of the randomized controlled trials comparing spinal manipulation with other therapies for patients with subacute or chronic neck pain showed an improvement on a 100-mm visual analogue scale of pain at 3 weeks of 12.6 mm (95% confidence interval, -0.15, 25.5) for manipulation compared with muscle relaxants or usual medical care. The highest quality randomized controlled trial demonstrated that spinal manipulation provided short-term relief for patients with tension-type headache. The complication rate for cervical spine manipulation is estimated to be between 5 and 10 per 10 million manipulations. CONCLUSIONS: Cervical spine manipulation and mobilization probably provide at least short-term benefits for some patients with neck pain and headaches. Although the complication rate of manipulation is small, the potential for adverse outcomes must be considered because of the possibility of permanent impairment or death.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Unconventional medicine in the United States-Prevalence, costs, and patterns of use
Eisenberg, D. M., Kessler, R. C., Foster, C., Norlock, F. E., Calkins, D. R., & Delbanco, T. L. (1993) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199301283280406 · Cited by 4,177
Cited by
A Cochrane Review of Manipulation and Mobilization for Mechanical Neck Disorders
Gross, A. R., Hoving, J. L., Haines, T. A., Goldsmith, C. H., Kay, T., Aker, P., & Bronfort, G. (2004) · Spine · doi:10.1097/01.brs.0000131218.35875.ed · Cited by 299
Self-citationVerde, P. E., & Ohmann, C. (2015) · Research Synthesis Methods · doi:10.1002/jrsm.1122 · Cited by 123
Madson, T. J., Cieslak, K. R., & Gay, R. E. (2010) · Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics · doi:10.1016/j.jmpt.2010.08.008 · Cited by 26
Metadata
- Authors
- Hurwitz, E. L., Aker, P. D., Adams, A. H., Meeker, W. C., & Shekelle, P. G.
- Venue
- Spine
- Published
- 1996-08
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 15
- Pages
- 1746-1759
- ISSN
- 0362-2436 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1995306377
- Cited by
- 463
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 9.29
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Manipulation and Mobilization of the Cervical Spine: A Systematic Review of the Literature. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/00007632-199608010-00007
- The paper
- Hurwitz, E. L., Aker, P. D., Adams, A. H., Meeker, W. C., & Shekelle, P. G. (1996). Manipulation and Mobilization of the Cervical Spine: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Spine. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199608010-00007
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.