Editing Chiropractic (section)

=== Practice guidelines ===

Reviews of research studies within the chiropractic community have been used to generate practice guidelines outlining standards that specify which chiropractic treatments are legitimate (i.e. supported by evidence) and conceivably reimbursable under [[managed care]] health payment systems.<ref name=Villanueva-Russell /> Evidence-based guidelines are supported by one end of an ideological continuum among chiropractors; the other end employs [[antiscientific]] reasoning and makes unsubstantiated claims.<ref name=Nelson /><ref name=History-Primer2>{{cite web|title=Chiropractic history: a primer |author=Joseph C. Keating Jr. |author2=Cleveland CS III |author3=Menke M |url=http://www.historyofchiropractic.org/assets/documents/ChiroHistoryPrimer.pdf |year=2005 |access-date=2008-06-16 |publisher=Association for the History of Chiropractic |archive-date=19 June 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130619204140/http://www.historyofchiropractic.org/assets/documents/ChiroHistoryPrimer.pdf |quote=A significant and continuing barrier to scientific progress within chiropractic are the anti-scientific and pseudo-scientific ideas (Keating 1997b) which have sustained the profession throughout a century of intense struggle with political medicine. Chiropractors' tendency to assert the meaningfulness of various theories and methods as a counterpoint to allopathic charges of quackery has created a defensiveness which can make critical examination of chiropractic concepts difficult (Keating and Mootz 1989). One example of this conundrum is the continuing controversy about the presumptive target of DCs' adjustive interventions: subluxation (Gatterman 1995; Leach 1994).  |author-link=Joseph C. Keating, Jr }}</ref><ref name=Keating-subluxation /><ref>{{cite journal |author=Joseph C. Keating Jr. |journal=Skeptical Inquirer |volume=21 |issue=4 |pages=37–43 |title=Chiropractic: science and antiscience and pseudoscience side by side |year=1997|author-link=Joseph C. Keating, Jr }}</ref><ref>{{cite book|author= Phillips RB|chapter= The evolution of vitalism and materialism and its impact on philosophy|pages=65–76|title= Principles and Practice of Chiropractic|edition=3rd|veditors=Haldeman S, Dagenais S, Budgell B |publisher=[[McGraw-Hill]]|year=2005|isbn=978-0-07-137534-4|display-editors=etal}}</ref> Chiropractic remains at a crossroads, and that in order to progress it would need to embrace science; the promotion by some for it to be a cure-all was both "misguided and irrational".<ref name=Reggars2011>{{cite journal | author = Reggars JW | title = Chiropractic at the crossroads or are we just going around in circles? | journal = Chiropractic & Manual Therapies| volume = 19 | page = 11 | year = 2011 | pmid = 21599991 | pmc = 3119029 | doi = 10.1186/2045-709X-19-11 | doi-access = free }}</ref> A 2007 survey of [[Alberta]] chiropractors found that they do not consistently apply research in practice, which may have resulted from a lack of research education and skills.<ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Suter E, Vanderheyden LC, Trojan LS, Verhoef MJ, Armitage GD | title = How important is research-based practice to chiropractors and massage therapists? | journal = Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics| volume = 30 | issue = 2 | pages = 109–15 | date = February 2007 | pmid = 17320731 | doi = 10.1016/j.jmpt.2006.12.013 }}</ref> Specific guidelines concerning the treatment of nonspecific (i.e., unknown cause) low back pain are inconsistent between countries.<ref name=Murphy>{{cite journal |vauthors=Murphy AY, van Teijlingen ER, Gobbi MO | title = Inconsistent grading of evidence across countries: a review of low back pain guidelines | journal = Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics| volume = 29 | issue = 7 | pages = 576–81, 581.e1–2 | date = September 2006 | pmid = 16949948 | doi = 10.1016/j.jmpt.2006.07.005 }}</ref>