Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17701230›Full record

SynthesisEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2007

Value of predictive instruments to determine persisting restriction of function in patients with subacute non-specific low back pain. Systematic review.

Roger Hilfiker, Lucas M Bachmann, Carolin A-M Heitz, Tobias Lorenz, Harri Joronen, Andreas Klipstein

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. The prevalence and psychosocial risk factors of chronic low back pain in KwaZulu-Natal.African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 2022
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Prognostic occupational factors for persistent low back pain in primary care.International archives of occupational and environmental health · 2013
    Article
  18. Predictive value of the Acute Low Back Pain Screening Questionnaire and the Örebro Musculoskeletal Pain Screening Questionnaire for persisting problems.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2012
    Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors.

Roger HilfikerDomain Health and Social Work, Physiotherapy, University of Applied Sciences Western Switzerland, Valais, Leukerbad, Switzerland. roger.hilfiker@hevs.ch
Lucas M Bachmann
Carolin A-M Heitz
Tobias Lorenz
Harri Joronen
Andreas Klipstein

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Low back pain (LBP) can restrict function with all the personal, interpersonal, and social consequences, such as a loss of independence and the inability to fulfil diverse roles in social life. Therefore, the prevention of the consequences of LBP would reduce costs, individual burdens and social burdens. Being able to fulfil the requirements of daily living is a cornerstone of quality of life. Early identification of patients who are likely to develop chronic pain with persistent restricted function is important, as effective prevention needs informed allocation of health care and social work. The aim of this study was to report and discuss the predictive value of instruments used to identify patients at risk of chronic LBP. Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Central, PEDro, Psyndex, PsychInfo/PsycLit, and Sociofile were systematically searched up to July 2004. Reference lists of systematic reviews on risk factors, and reference lists of the studies included were also searched. The selected studies evaluated predictive values of tools or predictive models applied 2-12 weeks after an initial medical consultation for a first or a new episode of non-specific LBP with restriction in function. Instruments had to predict function-related outcomes. Because of the heterogeneity of the instruments used we did not pool the data. Sixteen publications on function-related outcomes were included. The predictive instruments in these studies showed only moderate ability to predict or explain function-related outcome (maximal 51% of the variability). There was great variability in the predictors included and not all known risk factors were included in the models. The reviewed tools showed a limited ability to predict function-related outcome in patients with risk of chronic low back pain. Future instruments should be based on models with a comprehensive set of known risk factors. These models should be constructed and validated by international, coordinated research teams.

Indexed as

Disability EvaluationAcute DiseaseDatabases, BibliographicHumansLow Back PainOdds Ratio

Identifiers

PMID17701230
PMCPMC2223341

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.