Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16151755›Full record

Trial reportSchmerz (Berlin, Germany)2006

[Multimodal therapy patients with chronic cervical and lumbar pain. Results of a comparative prospective study].

E Neubauer, A Zahlten-Hinguranage, M Schiltenwolf, M Buchner

Abstract readClinical Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Schmerz (Berlin, Germany), 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Multidisciplinary pain management programs.Journal of pain research · 2013
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

E NeubauerOrthopädische Universitätsklinik, Heidelberg.
A Zahlten-Hinguranage
M Schiltenwolf
M Buchner
Heidelberg University · DEOrthopädische Universitätsklinik · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMultimodal therapy has been established for patients with chronic low back pain, but studies reporting results in patients with chronic neck pain are rare.

methodsThis prospective clinical study compared the results in 97 patients with chronic cervical pain and 231 patients with chronic lumbar pain after three weeks of multimodal therapy. The following factors were analyzed in both groups at the beginning and after 6 months: ability to work, pain intensity and functional back capacity.

resultsBoth groups had improved significantly after 6 months in all outcome parameters. Functional back capacity and ability to work at 6 months were not different between the two groups, but pain intensity was significantly lower in patients with low back pain compared to patients with neck pain.

conclusionMultimodal therapy is also an efficient treatment strategy for patients with chronic cervical pain as has already been shown for patients with chronic lumbar pain.

Indexed as

Avoidance LearningPhysical Therapy ModalitiesPsychotherapySick RoleActivities of Daily LivingAdultCombined Modality TherapyFemaleHumansLow Back PainMaleMiddle AgedNeck PainOutcome Assessment, Health CarePatient AdmissionPatient Care Team

Identifiers

PMID16151755
OpenAlexW109249080

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.