Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 12 Summary of quality scores and quality classification for 18 articles included in a systematic review on the effect of spinal manipulation on ‘brain function’

From: Unravelling functional neurology: does spinal manipulation have an effect on the brain? - a systematic literature review

Type of study First author / Year [ref] Scorea (risk of bias and external validity) Quality classification
Sham studies Sparks, 2017 [9] 5.5/7 (79%) acceptable
Baarbéé, 2018 [15] 3.5/6 (58%) medium
Lelic, 2016 [14] 2.5/6 (42%) medium
Comparison studies Christiansen, 2018 [28] 5/6 (83%) acceptable
Gay, 2014 [22] 5/7 (71%) acceptable
Kelly, 2000 [29] 3.5/6 (58%) medium
Dishman, 2002 [17] Haavik-Taylor, 2010a [26] Haavik-Taylor, 2010b [21] Fryer, 2012 [16] Niazi, 2015 [27] 2.5/6 (42%) medium
Haavik-Taylor, 2007a [20] Haavik-Taylor, 2007b [25] Haavik-Taylor, 2008 [28] Dishman, 2008 [23] Ogura, 2011 [19] HaaviK, 2016 [24] Inami, 2017 [8] 2/6 (33%) low
  1. aThe quality score for each study could range from 0 to 6 or 7, depending on their respective study design and the type of study subjects included. Each quality score was then converted on percentage to allow comparisons. Quality classification: ‘low’: 0–33%; ‘medium’: 34–67%; ‘acceptable’: 68%-100