↓ Skip to main content

Dose–response of spinal manipulation for cervicogenic headache: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Chiropractic & Manual Therapies, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
75 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Dose–response of spinal manipulation for cervicogenic headache: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Published in
Chiropractic & Manual Therapies, June 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12998-016-0105-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Linda Hanson, Mitchell Haas, Gert Bronfort, Darcy Vavrek, Craig Schulz, Brent Leininger, Roni Evans, Leslie Takaki, Moni Neradilek

Abstract

Cervicogenic headache is a prevalent and costly pain condition commonly treated by chiropractors. There is evidence to support the effectiveness for spinal manipulation, but the dose of treatment required to achieve maximal relief remains unknown. The purpose of this paper is to describe the methodology for a randomized controlled trial evaluating the dose-response of spinal manipulation for chronic cervicogenic headache in an adult population. This is a mixed-methods, two-site, prospective, parallel groups, observer-blind, randomized controlled trial conducted at university-affiliated research clinics in the Portland, OR and Minneapolis, MN areas. The primary outcome is patient reported headache frequency. Other outcomes include self-reported headache intensity, disability, quality of life, improvement, neck pain intensity and frequency, satisfaction, medication use, outside care, cervical motion, pain pressure thresholds, health care utilization, health care costs, and lost productivity. Qualitative interviews are also conducted to evaluate patients' expectations of treatment. With growing concerns regarding the costs and side effects of commonly used conventional treatments, greater numbers of headache sufferers are seeking other approaches to care. This is the first full-scale randomized controlled trial assessing the dose-response of spinal manipulation therapy on outcomes for cervicogenic headache. The results of this study will provide important evidence for the management of cervicogenic headache in adults. ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT01530321).

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 1 1%
Unknown 74 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 24%
Unspecified 11 15%
Student > Bachelor 11 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 11%
Other 19 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 23 31%
Unspecified 15 20%
Arts and Humanities 3 4%
Computer Science 2 3%
Other 7 9%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 July 2016.
All research outputs
#3,138,167
of 13,009,273 outputs
Outputs from Chiropractic & Manual Therapies
#193
of 335 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,888
of 264,241 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Chiropractic & Manual Therapies
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,009,273 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 335 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.2. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 264,241 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them