Influence of Active Release Technique on Quadriceps Inhibition and Strength: A Pilot Study

A study is more likely to appear in the literature and thus be indexed and publicly accessible, if it shows a strong statistically significant or positive result. A study that does not show such results has a greater chance of ending up in a file drawer, either because the author or his employer did not think the result was worth reporting, or because a journal was less interested in publishing a study that came up with negative findings. This decreased likelihood of study results being published when they are not statistically significant or are otherwise less interesting is referred to as publication bias.

In 1995, journals of complementary and alternative medicine published virtually no studies (1%) with negative results.1 By 2000, the percentage of studies with negative results being published in journals of complementary and alternative medicine had only improved to 5%.2 Furthermore, publication bias has been shown to be rife throughout much of the biomedical literature 3., 4., 5., 6. suggesting that the peer-reviewed biomedical literature is far from objective. I therefore applaud the decision of the authors to submit and editors of the Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics to publish a recent pilot study 7 that set out to determine if active release technique could influence strength and muscle inhibition in the quadriceps muscles of athletes with anterior knee pain, but which came to a negative conclusion.

Some from within the chiropractic profession may still assume that no good can come from making public negative chiropractic research findings. Such is not, however, the case. Progress, which some have suggested is the defining characteristic of science,8 can come in many shapes and forms. The reduction of publication bias, which necessarily depends upon the publication of more negative studies, is one such sign of progress and is therefore a marker of this professions scientific maturation. Along with all other health care researchers and disciplines the chiropractic profession should continue to strive toward improving the conduct and unbiased reporting of research findings, prospective trial registration, and easier access to data from published and unpublished studies despite their conclusions.