Skip to main content

Table 2 Questionnaire about beliefs in the effectiveness of the interventions in an RCT on spinal manipulation

From: The effect of a single spinal manipulation on cardiovascular autonomic activity and the relationship to pressure pain threshold: a randomized, cross-over, sham-controlled trial

A

Subjects had same beliefs for SM and sham

29/41

71%

B

Subject thought that both interventions were effective and sham > SM

1/41

2%

C

Subjects thought that both interventions were effective and SM > sham

2/41

5%

D

Subjects did not know if SM was effective but thought that the sham was effective

3/41

7%

E

Subjects did not know if the sham was effective but thought that the SM was effective

2/41

5%

F

Subjects did not know if the SM was effective but thought that the sham was ineffective

2/41

5%

G

Subjects thought that SM was effective and sham was ineffective

2/41

5%

  1. Notes
  2. - A: 24/29 subjects thought with the same certainty that both interventions were effective and 5/29 “did not know”
  3. - sham > SM means stronger certainty for the sham
  4. - SM > sham means stronger certainty for the SM
  5. Abbreviation:
  6. SM spinal manipulation (HVLA technique)
Back to article page

Chiropractic & Manual Therapies

ISSN: 2045-709X