Post-publication Peer Review (P3R) is an online forum for ongoingreview peer review. To submit a P3R please go to the article you wish to respond to and click on the link that reads "P3Rs: Submit a Response." Submission of P3Rs are open to all health care professionals and experts in related fields.

Post-publication Peer Reviews to:

REVIEW ARTICLES:
Sunita Vohra, Bradley C. Johnston, Kristie Cramer, and Kim Humphreys
Adverse Events Associated With Pediatric Spinal Manipulation: A Systematic Review
Pediatrics 2007; 119: e275-e283 [Abstract] [Full text] [PDF]
*P3Rs: Submit a response to this article

P3Rs published:

[Read P3R] Lack of Data Regarding Pediatric Manipulation
Jennifer E Redmond   (20 January 2007)
[Read P3R] Flawed paper stirs a profession.
Joseph J. Ierano   (14 October 2007)

Lack of Data Regarding Pediatric Manipulation 20 January 2007
Next P3R Top
Jennifer E Redmond,
chiropractor
Samsara Chiropractic Wellness Center

Send letter to journal:
Re: Lack of Data Regarding Pediatric Manipulation

doctorredmond{at}gmail.com Jennifer E Redmond

Many pieces of the picture are missing in this article. What were the methods of "manipulation" used on these children? How old were the children? What were the symptoms that they presented with? Were these pre-existing conditions? How much force was used in the manipulation? Was this simply "manipulation" performed, or a Chiropractic "adjustment?" There is too much data missing for this to be considered a reputable study.

Conflict of Interest:

I am a chiropractor who adjusts children.
Flawed paper stirs a profession. 14 October 2007
Previous P3R Top
Joseph J. Ierano,
Doctor of Chiropractic
Private, solo practice of chiropractic.

Send letter to journal:
Re: Flawed paper stirs a profession.

info{at}spine.net.au Joseph J. Ierano

Chiropractic is at times a very nervous profession. Especially unnerving is a paper that addresses a serious subject, necessary in its execution, flawed in its production.

A meta-analysis such as this simply re-states the flaws of other studies; work done by others of dubious merit.

Dubious merit because there is no examination of the uniformity of interventions administered in the studies which they categorise at "spinal manipulation". Examination of a procedure surely deliniates that procedure in detail and presents it to the reader. Just what is "pediatric spinal manipulation"?

This study is what it is: a precurser to the study being rightly done. Lets just see what the adverse effects are of this procedure which seems to define chiropractors. But first, define the procedure, and don't make any serious assumptions until that scientific method is applied properly.

This may sound unbelievable, but In my experience (over a decade) of adjusting hundreds of children there has not been one event that could be categorised as "adverse". Similarly, in communication with my profession and state boards here in Australia, I do not think that one solitary action of litigation against a chiropractor has been brought for seriously harming or death of a child in administrering care. Is this not an astounding statistic in comparison with proper medical paediatric care? Bring on the science, please.

Conflict of Interest:

Registered Chiropractor educated in University-based undergraduate paediatric chiropractic and post- graduate specialisation in upper cervical chiropractic.