Are McKenzie exercises more effective than stabilization exercises on pain and disability in individuals with chronic nonspecific low back pain?

focus on these points:•Summarise and discuss the findings and conclusions of the review in a balanced and impartial way, in the context of previous theory, evidence and practice;
•Explicitly and intuitively link your conclusions to the evidence reviewed;
•Discuss the strengths and limitations of the literature and, by implication, the review, including
•Considering the scientific quality of included studies and methodological problems in the literature (e.g., methodological rigor or lack thereof, the amount of evidence, its consistency, and its methodological diversity). Conclusions should be tempered by the flaws and weaknesses in the evidence. Perhaps propose a new conceptualisation or theory which accounts for inconsistencies
•Establish to what extent existing research has progressed towards clarifying a particular problem/formulate general statements or an overarching conceptualization. Quantitative or qualitative reviews may conclude that the available evidence suggests one of four possibilities (see Baumeister & Leary, 1997, for a detailed discussion of these):
1) A hypothesis is correct, at least based on the present evidence
2) A hypothesis, although not proven, is currently the best guess and should be assumed to be true until contrary evidence emerges
3) It is not clear whether a hypothesis is true or false
4) A hypothesis is false
•Comment on, evaluate, extend, or develop theory;
•Draw conclusions and make recommendations for practice;
•Describe directions for future theory, evidence and practice by pointing out remaining unresolved