Criteria For Scientific Validity Research Articles

Digital Twins (Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning) for Diagnosis of Alzheimer’s Disease: Ethical and Regulatory Aspects

Recent strides in artificial intelligence and machine learning have gained considerable attention in the diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease due to its ability to detect the disease at an early stage. Along with the advances in AI (Artificial Intelligence) and ML (Machine Learning) for the detection of AD (Alzheimer’s Disease), ethical considerations and regulatory aspects must also be meticulously addressed. This review covers the ethical questions that arise with the use of AI and ML in AD diagnosis. Privacy and protection of individual’s personal data, clinicians making their decisions based on AI, and unbiased and autonomy concerns like consent of the patient are covered here. Given their transformational nature, it remains entirely unclear how AI-driven methods for studying the human brain will impact normative instruments in research ethics and neuro-ethics, as well as fulfill appropriate criteria of scientific validity. Explainable AI and ML systems have been developed recently to avoid potential bias and unethical conduct. This article also discusses the type of potential personal patient information that could be exploited during the use of AI and ML-based algorithms.

Inclusive research with people with intellectual disabilities. Current research status analysis

The widespread interest in inclusive research justifies the need to establish its added value and scientific merit. We analysed recent studies following the analyses by Walmsley, Strnadová, and Johnson aiming to assess the relevance of such projects from the perspective of the involved people and to assess their scientific value. We conducted a systematic analysis of studies produced between 2016 and 2021. We designed our own tools for assessing added and scientific value based on available research and commonly used criteria. The significance of inclusive research for persons with intellectual disability was confirmed. The analysed studies met the criteria for scientific validity to a varying degree. Adhering to the principles applied in the scientific community is key, considering first ethics, careful choice of the method, and activating people involved in the research.

Avaliação qualitativa das técnicas de natação

O objetivo desta revisão sistemática é identificar os métodos de avaliação para a aprendizagem da natação que são utilizados/propostos na literatura. Foram avaliados estudos nas bases Pubmed, Scielo e Lilacs. Quinze estudos foram selecionados e os resultados indicam que: os instrumentos avaliativos adotados atendem satisfatoriamente os critérios de validade científica; as amostras utilizadas são predominantemente de crianças; os estudos dão preferência aos questinários tipo checagem e à utilização de vídeos; os itens são demasiadamente longos para aplicação prática; a relação tempo/fadiga é desconsiderada na descrição. No final, realizamos sugestões para futuras pesquisas e para a avaliação da natação.

The Rehabilitated Image in the Written Press in Cameroon and Its Mediation Challenges: The Example of <i>Cameroon Tribune</i>

The Cameroonian daily press is now taking a new look at the use of photography in its columns. Photography is therefore at the heart of the new information system: the application of a new formula, a photographic formula, therefore visual, which is a novelty. The aim of our article is to highlight how the Cameroonian daily press constructs the discursive staging of this visual content. It proposes to examine the ways in which the news image in Cameroon Tribune is constituted in journalistic writing. In this article, we will analyse the photographic content of the daily newspaper Cameroon Tribune. The corpus consists of 1245 photographs from 25 issues published between 21 October and 22 November 2019. The technique used is media content analysis, which allows us to produce exhaustive descriptive statements that meet the criteria of scientific validity and reproducibility. Emancipated from its strict illustrative function, photography in the daily newspaper Cameroon Tribune then becomes fully a means of information and communication, in the same way as text. This translates into the construction of informative sets such as the importance of the surface area of the visual content which gives pride of place to the visual, giving an impression of abundance that is perceptible from the Front Page. One of the important features of the newspaper’s iconography is the great positivity of its images, which reinforces the closeness between the reader and the news. In total, the newspaper highlights photographs of limited informative interest: these are portraits that show the faces of the protagonists of the articles, to the detriment of current events.

¿Puede la investigación jurídica considerarse científicamente válida? La argumentación como criterio de validez

Asumiendo las críticas que con frecuencia recibe la investigación jurídica por la falta de atención a las cuestiones de método, el presente artículo plantea la necesidad de gene­rar pautas que garanticen el rigor académico del trabajo jurídico y propone a la argumentación como su criterio de validez científica. Con base en Atienza, el texto sugiere el uso de la lógica proposicional, del modelo de argumentación de Toulmin, así como de las reglas del discurso que Alexy toma de Habermas, como elementos para la construcción de un modelo de evalua­ción de la investigación jurídica que le garantice rigor metódico y validez científica.

Stop propagating the learning styles myth

We all differ from each other in a multitude of ways, and as such we also prefer many different things whether it is music, food or learning. Because of this, many students, parents, teachers, administrators and even researchers feel that it is intuitively correct to say that since different people prefer to learn visually, auditively, kinesthetically or whatever other way one can think of, we should also tailor teaching, learning situations and learning materials to those preferences. Is this a problem? The answer is a resounding: Yes! Broadly speaking, there are a number of major problems with the notion of learning styles. First, there is quite a difference between the way that someone prefers to learn and that which actually leads to effective and efficient learning. Second, a preference for how one studies is not a learning style. Most so-called learning styles are based on types; they classify people into distinct groups. The assumption that people cluster into distinct groups, however, receives very little support from objective studies. Finally, nearly all studies that report evidence for learning styles fail to satisfy just about all of the key criteria for scientific validity. This article delivers an evidence-informed plea to teachers, administrators and researchers to stop propagating the learning styles myth.

New atheism and moral theory

Over the past decade, New Atheists have campaigned against the influence of religion in public life and favored a more enlightened understanding of the world – one based on the methods and theories of the natural sciences. Although the leaders of this movement refuse to give religion, even moderate religion, any place in determining moral conduct, they offer few alternatives. Most define moral responsibility by referring to facts about human biology or natural moral intuitions, yet without adequately defending this or exploring the possibilities of non-naturalistic secular moralities. This essay argues that New Atheists' moral theories tend to be weak because of their naturalist assumptions. Its leading proponents seem to be unwilling to acknowledge that moral philosophy can play a role in developing secular moral precepts because philosophy fails to meet their strong criteria of scientific validity. This position is misguided not only because it has led New Atheists to defend weak moral theories but also because the methods of inquiry used in moral philosophy make it distinct from faith for many of the same reasons that the New Atheists think that science is distinct from faith.

Time and its representations: At the crossroads between psychoanalysis and neuroscience

Representations of time and time measurements depend on subjective constructs that vary according to changes in our concepts, beliefs and technological advances. Similarly, the past, the future and also the present are subjective representations that depend on each individual’s psychic time and biological time. Nonetheless, the construction of these representations is influenced by objective factors (cognitive, physiological and physical) related to neuroscience. Thus, studying representation of time lies at the crossroads between neuroscience and psychoanalysis. Furthermore, these objective factors are supposed to meet criteria of scientific validity, such as reproducibility. However, reproducibility depends on the individual’s state that will not be exactly the same later, due precisely to the passage of time. The criteria of scientific validity are therefore only applicable if we place ourselves at time “ t”. This does not take into account lifespan biological changes. In fact, it is not neuroscience that is opposed to psychoanalysis based on this notion of subjectivity, illustrated by the concept of temporality, but rather the use and interpretation of neuroscience centered on taking snapshots. We can assume that focusing on present time, in particular instantaneity rather than infinity, prevents us from facing our own finitude. Individuals with autism provide us a good illustration of this idea. Through their autistic behaviors, they are totally focused on the present moment and create repeated discontinuity out of continuity. The hypothesis stated here is that children with autism need to create stereotyped discontinuity because discontinuity repeated at regular intervals might have been fundamentally lacking in their physiological development, due to circadian rhythm alterations. In conclusion, the question is raised that both the current use of neuroscience and the current representation of time might be a means of managing our fear of death, giving us the illusion of controlling the uncontrollable, in particular the passage of time.

Course and Prognostic Factors for Neck Pain in the General Population: Results of the Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders

Study Design Best evidence synthesis. Objective To undertake a best evidence synthesis on course and prognosis of neck pain and its associated disorders in the general population. Summary of Background Data Knowing the course of neck pain guides expectations for recovery. Identifying prognostic factors assists in planning public policies, formulating interventions, and promoting lifestyle changes to decrease the burden of neck pain. Methods The Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and its Associated Disorders (Neck Pain Task Force) conducted a critical review of literature published between 1980 and 2006 to assemble the best evidence on neck pain. Findings from studies meeting criteria for scientific validity were abstracted into evidence tables and included in a best evidence synthesis. Results We found 226 articles on the course and prognostic factors in neck pain and its associated disorders. After critical review, 70 (31%) of these were accepted on scientific merit. Six studies related to course and 7 to prognostic factors in the general population. Between half and three quarters of persons in these populations with current neck pain will report neck pain again 1 to 5 years later. Younger age predicted better outcome. General exercise was unassociated with outcome, although regular bicycling predicted poor outcome in 1 study. Psychosocial factors, including psychologic health, coping patterns, and need to socialize, were the strongest prognostic factors. Several potential prognostic factors have not been well studied, including degenerative changes, genetic factors, and compensation policies. Conclusion The Neck Pain Task Force undertook a best evidence synthesis to establish a baseline of the current best evidence on the course and prognosis for this symptom. General exercise was not prognostic of better outcome; however, several psychosocial factors were prognostic of outcome.

Course and Prognostic Factors for Neck Pain in Workers: Results of the Bone and Joint Decade 2000-2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders

Study Design Best-evidence synthesis. Objective To perform a best evidence synthesis on the course and prognostic factors for neck pain and its associated disorders in workers. Summary of Background Data Knowledge of the course of neck pain in workers guides expectations for recovery. Identifying prognostic factors assists in planning effective workplace policies, formulating interventions and promoting lifestyle changes to decrease the frequency and burden of neck pain in the workplace. Methods The Bone and Joint Decade 2000-2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and its Associated Disorders (Neck Pain Task Force) conducted a critical review of the literature published between 1980 and 2006 to assemble the best evidence on neck pain and its associated disorders. Studies meeting criteria for scientific validity were included in a best evidence synthesis. Results We found 226 articles related to course and prognostic factors in neck pain and its associated disorders. After a critical review, 70 (31%) were accepted on scientific merit; 14 of these studies related to course and prognostic factors in working populations. Between 60% and 80% of workers with neck pain reported neck pain 1 year later. Few workplace or physical job demands were identified as being linked to recovery from neck pain. However, workers with little influence on their own work situation had a slightly poorer prognosis, and white-collar workers had a better prognosis than blue-collar workers. General exercise was associated with better prognosis; prior neck pain and prior sick leave were associated with poorer prognosis. Conclusion The Neck Pain Task Force presents a report of current best evidence on course and prognosis for neck pain. Few modifiable prognostic factors were identified; however, having some influence over one's own job and being physically active seem to hold promise as prognostic factors.

Course and Prognostic Factors for Neck Pain in Whiplash-Associated Disorders (WAD): Results of the Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders

Study Design Best evidence synthesis. Objective To perform a best evidence synthesis on the course and prognostic factors for neck pain and its associated disorders in Grades I–III whiplash-associated disorders (WAD). Summary of Background Data Knowledge of the course of recovery of WAD guides expectations for recovery. Identifying prognostic factors assists in planning management and intervention strategies and effective compensation policies to decrease the burden of WAD. Methods The Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and its Associated Disorders (Neck Pain Task Force) conducted a critical review of the literature published between 1980 and 2006 to assemble the best evidence on neck pain and its associated disorders. Studies meeting criteria for scientific validity were included in a best evidence synthesis. Results We found 226 articles related to course and prognostic factors in neck pain and its associated disorders. After a critical review, 70 (31%) were accepted on scientific merit; 47 of these studies related to course and prognostic factors in WAD. The evidence suggests that approximately 50% of those with WAD will report neck pain symptoms 1 year after their injuries. Greater initial pain, more symptoms, and greater initial disability predicted slower recovery. Few factors related to the collision itself (for example, direction of the collision, headrest type) were prognostic; however, postinjury psychological factors such as passive coping style, depressed mood, and fear of movement were prognostic for slower or less complete recovery. There is also preliminary evidence that the prevailing compensation system is prognostic for recovery in WAD. Conclusion The Neck Pain Task Force undertook a best evidence synthesis to establish a baseline of the current best evidence on the course and prognosis for WAD. Recovery of WAD seems to be multifactorial.

Methods for the Best Evidence Synthesis on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders: The Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders

Study Design Best evidence synthesis. Objective To provide a detailed description of the methods undertaken in a systematic search and perform a best evidence synthesis on the frequency, determinants, assessment, interventions, course and prognosis of neck pain, and its associated disorders. Summary of Background Data Neck pain is an important cause of health burden; however, the published information is vast, and stakeholders would benefit from a summary of the best evidence. Methods The Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and its Associated Disorders conducted a systematic search and critical review of the literature published between 1980 and 2006 to assemble the best evidence on neck pain. Citations were screened for relevance to the Neck Pain Task Force mandate, using a priori criteria, and relevant studies were critically reviewed for their internal scientific validity. Findings from studies meeting criteria for scientific validity were synthesized into a best evidence synthesis. Results We found 31,878 citations, of which 1203 were relevant to the mandate of the Neck Pain Task Force. After critical review, 552 studies (46%) were judged scientifically admissible and were compiled into the best evidence synthesis. Conclusion The Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and its Associated Disorders undertook a best evidence synthesis to establish a baseline of the current best evidence on the epidemiology, assessment and classification of neck pain, as well as interventions and prognosis for this symptom. This article reports the methods used and the outcomes from the review. We found that 46% of the research literature was of acceptable scientific quality to inform clinical practice, policy-making, and future research.

Research Priorities and Methodological Implications: The Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders

Study Design Best evidence synthesis. Objective To report on gaps in the literature and make methodologic recommendations based on our review of the literature on frequency and risk factors, assessment, intervention, and course and prognostic factors for neck pain and its associated disorders. Summary of Background Data The scientific literature on neck pain is large and of variable quality. We reviewed 1203 studies and judged 46% to be of sufficient scientific validity to be included in the best evidence synthesis. Scientific quality varied across study topics, and fundamental questions remain about important issues. Methods The Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and its Associated Disorders (Neck Pain Task Force) conducted a critical review of the literature published between 1980 and 2006 to assemble the best evidence on neck pain and its associated disorders. Studies meeting criteria for scientific validity were included in a best evidence synthesis. Results We outline a large number of gaps in the current literature. For example, we found important gaps in our knowledge about neck pain in children (risk factors, screening criteria to rule out serious injury, management, course and prognosis); and in the prevention of neck pain-related activity limitations. Few studies addressed the impact of culture or social policies (such as governmental health policies or insurance compensation policies) on neck pain. A number of important questions remain about the effectiveness of commonly used interventions for neck pain. Conclusion The Neck Pain Task Force undertook a best evidence synthesis to establish a baseline of the current best evidence on the course and prognosis for whiplash-associated disorders. We identify a number of gaps in the current knowledge, and provide recommendations for the conduct of future studies.

The Burden and Determinants of Neck Pain in the General Population: Results of the Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders

Study Design Best evidence synthesis. Objective To undertake a best evidence synthesis of the published evidence on the burden and determinants of neck pain and its associated disorders in the general population. Summary of Background Data The evidence on burden and determinants of neck has not previously been summarized. Methods The Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders performed a systematic search and critical review of literature published between 1980 and 2006 to assemble the best evidence on neck pain. Studies meeting criteria for scientific validity were included in a best evidence synthesis. Results We identified 469 studies on burden and determinants of neck pain, and judged 249 to be scientifically admissible; 101 articles related to the burden and determinants of neck pain in the general population. Incidence ranged from 0.055 per 1000 person years (disc herniation with radiculopathy) to 213 per 1000 persons (self-reported neck pain). Incidence of neck injuries during competitive sports ranged from 0.02 to 21 per 1000 exposures. The 12-month prevalence of pain typically ranged between 30% and 50%; the 12-month prevalence of activity-limiting pain was 1.7% to 11.5%. Neck pain was more prevalent among women and prevalence peaked in middle age. Risk factors for neck pain included genetics, poor psychological health, and exposure to tobacco. Disc degeneration was not identified as a risk factor. The use of sporting gear (helmets, face shields) to prevent other types of injury was not associated with increased neck injuries in bicycling, hockey, or skiing. Conclusion Neck pain is common. Nonmodifiable risk factors for neck pain included age, gender, and genetics. Modifiable factors included smoking, exposure to tobacco, and psychological health. Disc degeneration was not identified as a risk factor. Future research should concentrate on longitudinal designs exploring preventive strategies and modifiable risk factors for neck pain.

Course and Prognostic Factors for Neck Pain in Workers

Best-evidence synthesis. To perform a best evidence synthesis on the course and prognostic factors for neck pain and its associated disorders in workers. Knowledge of the course of neck pain in workers guides expectations for recovery. Identifying prognostic factors assists in planning effective workplace policies, formulating interventions and promoting lifestyle changes to decrease the frequency and burden of neck pain in the workplace. The Bone and Joint Decade 2000−2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and its Associated Disorders (Neck Pain Task Force) conducted a critical review of the literature published between 1980 and 2006 to assemble the best evidence on neck pain and its associated disorders. Studies meeting criteria for scientific validity were included in a best evidence synthesis. We found 226 articles related to course and prognostic factors in neck pain and its associated disorders. After a critical review, 70 (31%) were accepted on scientific merit; 14 of these studies related to course and prognostic factors in working populations. Between 60% and 80% of workers with neck pain reported neck pain1 year later. Few workplace or physical job demands were identified as being linked to recovery from neck pain. However, workers with little influence on their own work situation had a slightly poorer prognosis, and white-collar workers had a better prognosis than blue-collar workers. General exercise was associated with better prognosis; prior neck pain and prior sick leave were associated with poorer prognosis. The Neck Pain Task Force presents a report of current best evidence on course and prognosis for neck pain. Few modifiable prognostic factors were identified; however, having some influence over one's own job and being physically active seem to hold promise as prognostic factors.

Course and Prognostic Factors for Neck Pain in Whiplash-Associated Disorders (WAD)

Best evidence synthesis. To perform a best evidence synthesis on the course and prognostic factors for neck pain and its associated disorders in Grades I–III whiplash-associated disorders (WAD). Knowledge of the course of recovery of WAD guides expectations for recovery. Identifying prognostic factors assists in planning management and intervention strategies and effective compensation policies to decrease the burden of WAD. The Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and its Associated Disorders (Neck Pain Task Force) conducted a critical review of the literature published between 1980 and 2006 to assemble the best evidence on neck pain and its associated disorders. Studies meeting criteria for scientific validity were included in a best evidence synthesis. We found 226 articles related to course and prognostic factors in neck pain and its associated disorders. After a critical review, 70 (31%) were accepted on scientific merit; 47 of these studies related to course and prognostic factors in WAD. The evidence suggests that approximately 50% of those with WAD will report neck pain symptoms 1 year after their injuries. Greater initial pain, more symptoms, and greater initial disability predicted slower recovery. Few factors related to the collision itself (for example, direction of the collision, headrest type) were prognostic; however, postinjury psychological factors such as passive coping style, depressed mood, and fear of movement were prognostic for slower or less complete recovery. There is also preliminary evidence that the prevailing compensation system is prognostic for recovery in WAD. The Neck Pain Task Force undertook a best evidence synthesis to establish a baseline of the current best evidence on the course and prognosis for WAD. Recovery of WAD seems to be multifactorial.

The Burden and Determinants of Neck Pain in the General Population

Best evidence synthesis. To undertake a best evidence synthesis of the published evidence on the burden and determinants of neck pain and its associated disorders in the general population. The evidence on burden and determinants of neck has not previously been summarized. The Bone and Joint Decade 2000−2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders performed a systematic search and critical review of literature published between 1980 and 2006 to assemble the best evidence on neck pain. Studies meeting criteria for scientific validity were included in a best evidence synthesis. We identified 469 studies on burden and determinants of neck pain, and judged 249 to be scientifically admissible; 101 articles related to the burden and determinants of neck pain in the general population. Incidence ranged from 0.055 per 1000 person years (disc herniation with radiculopathy) to 213 per 1000 persons (self-reported neck pain). Incidence of neck injuries during competitive sports ranged from 0.02 to 21 per 1000 exposures. The 12-month prevalence of pain typically ranged between 30% and 50%; the 12-month prevalence of activity-limiting pain was 1.7% to 11.5%. Neck pain was more prevalent among women and prevalence peaked in middle age. Risk factors for neck pain included genetics, poor psychological health, and exposure to tobacco. Disc degeneration was not identified as a risk factor. The use of sporting gear (helmets, face shields) to prevent other types of injury was not associated with increased neck injuries in bicycling, hockey, or skiing. Neck pain is common. Nonmodifiable risk factors for neck pain included age, gender, and genetics. Modifiable factors included smoking, exposure to tobacco, and psychological health. Disc degeneration was not identified as a risk factor. Future research should concentrate on longitudinal designs exploring preventive strategies and modifiable risk factors for neck pain.

Course and Prognostic Factors for Neck Pain in the General Population

Best evidence synthesis. To undertake a best evidence synthesis on course and prognosis of neck pain and its associated disorders in the general population. Knowing the course of neck pain guides expectations for recovery. Identifying prognostic factors assists in planning public policies, formulating interventions, and promoting lifestyle changes to decrease the burden of neck pain. The Bone and Joint Decade 2000 –2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and its Associated Disorders (Neck Pain Task Force) conducted a critical review of literature published between 1980 and 2006 to assemble the best evidence on neck pain. Findings fromstudiesmeeting criteria for scientific validity were abstracted into evidence tables and included in a best evidence synthesis. We found 226 articles on the course and prognostic factors in neck pain and its associated disorders. After critical review, 70 (31) of these were accepted on scientific merit. Six studies related to course and 7 to prognostic factors in the general population. Between half and three quarters of persons in these populations with current neck pain will report neck pain again 1 to 5 years later. Younger age predicted better outcome. General exercise was unassociated with outcome, although regular bicycling predicted poor outcome in 1 study. Psychosocial factors, including psychologic health, coping patterns, and need to socialize, were the strongest prognostic factors. Several potential prognostic factors have not been well studied, including degenerative changes, genetic factors, and compensation policies. The Neck Pain Task Force undertook a best evidence synthesis to establish a baseline of the current best evidence on the course and prognosis for this symptom. General exercise was not prognostic of better outcome; however, several psychosocial factors were prognostic of outcome.

Research Priorities and Methodological Implications

Best evidence synthesis. To report on gaps in the literature and make methodologic recommendations based on our review of the literature on frequency and risk factors, assessment, intervention, and course and prognostic factors for neck pain and its associated disorders. The scientific literature on neck pain is large and of variable quality. We reviewed 1203 studies and judged 46 to be of sufficient scientific validity to be included in the best evidence synthesis. Scientific quality varied across study topics, and fundamental questions remain about important issues. The Bone and Joint Decade 2000 –2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and its Associated Disorders (Neck Pain Task Force) conducted a critical review of the literature published between 1980 and 2006 to assemble the best evidence on neck pain and its associated disorders. Studies meeting criteria for scientific validity were included in a best evidence synthesis. We outline a large number of gaps in the current literature. For example,we found important gaps in our knowledge about neck pain in children (risk factors, screening criteria to rule out serious injury, management, course and prognosis); and in the prevention of neck pain-related activity limitations. Few studies addressed the impact of culture or social policies (such as governmental health policies or insurance compensation policies) on neck pain. A number of important questions remain about the effectiveness of commonly used interventions for neck pain. The Neck Pain Task Force undertook a best evidence synthesis to establish a baseline of the current best evidence on the course and prognosis for whiplash-associated disorders. We identify a number of gaps in the current knowledge, and provide recommendations for the conduct of future studies.

Methods for the Best Evidence Synthesis on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders

Best evidence synthesis. To provide a detailed description of the methods undertaken in a systematic search and perform a best evidence synthesis on the frequency, determinants, assessment, interventions, course and prognosis of neck pain, and its associated disorders. Neck pain is an important cause of health burden; however, the published information is vast, and stakeholders would benefit from a summary of the best evidence. The Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and its Associated Disorders conducted a systematic search and critical review of the literature published between 1980 and 2006 to assemble the best evidence on neck pain. Citations were screened for relevance to the Neck Pain Task Force mandate, using a priori criteria, and relevant studies were critically reviewed for their internal scientific validity. Findings from studies meeting criteria for scientific validity were synthesized into a best evidence synthesis. We found 31,878 citations, of which 1203 were relevant to the mandate of the Neck Pain Task Force. After critical review, 552 studies (46) were judged scientifically admissible and were compiled into the best evidence synthesis. The Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and its Associated Disorders undertook a best evidence synthesis to establish a baseline of the current best evidence on the epidemiology, assessment and classification of neck pain, as well as interventions and prognosis for this symptom. This article reports the methods used and the outcomes from the review. We found that 46 of the research literature was of acceptable scientific quality to inform clinical practice, policy-making, and future research.