Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18254037›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2008

Individual patient education for low back pain.

A Engers, P Jellema, M Wensing, D A W M van der Windt, R Grol, M W van Tulder

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 88 papers, 14 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
88citing papers in PubMed, 14 pooled it
15.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

88 citing papers in PubMed, 14 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 298 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Back schools for acute and subacute non-specific low-back pain.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016
    Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation for chronic low back pain.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014
    Pooled it
  14. A systematic review on the effectiveness of physical and rehabilitation interventions for chronic non-specific low back pain.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 · 2011
    Pooled it
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

28 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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 at 3 institutions in 4 countries.

A EngersRadboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Centre For Quality of Care Research (WOK), (117 KWAZO), PO Box 9101, Nijmegen, Netherlands, 6500 HB. a.engers@planet.nl
P Jellema
M Wensing
D A W M van der Windt
R Grol
M W van Tulder
Radboud University Nijmegen · NLAmsterdam UMC Location VUmc · NLCancer Research And Biostatistics · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhile many different types of patient education are widely used, the effect of individual patient education for low-back pain (LBP) has not yet been systematically reviewed.

objectivesTo determine whether individual patient education is effective in the treatment of non-specific low-back pain and which type is most effective. SEARCH STRATEGY: A computerized literature search of MEDLINE (1966 to July 2006), EMBASE (1988 to July 2006), CINAHL (1982 to July 2006), PsycINFO (1984 to July 2006), and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2006, Issue 2) was performed. References cited in the identified articles were screened. SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies were selected if the design was a randomised controlled trial; if patients experienced LBP; if the type of intervention concerned individual patient education, and if the publication was written in English, German, or Dutch. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The methodological quality was independently assessed by two review authors. Articles that met at least 50% of the quality criteria were considered high quality. Main outcome measures were pain intensity, global measure of improvement, back pain-specific functional status, return-to-work, and generic functional status. Analysis comprised a qualitative analysis. Evidence was classified as strong, moderate, limited, conflicting or no evidence. MAIN

resultsOf the 24 studies included in this review, 14 (58%) were of high quality. Individual patient education was compared with no intervention in 12 studies; with non-educational interventions in 11 studies; and with other individual educational interventions in eight studies. Results showed that for patients with subacute LBP, there is strong evidence that an individual 2.5 hour oral educational session is more effective on short-term and long-term return-to-work than no intervention. Educational interventions that were less intensive were not more effective than no intervention. Furthermore, there is strong evidence that individual education for patients with (sub)acute LBP is as effective as non-educational interventions on long-term pain and global improvement and that for chronic patients, individual education is less effective for back pain-specific function when compared to more intensive interventions. Comparison of different types of individual education did not show significant differences. AUTHORS'

conclusionsFor patients with acute or subacute LBP, intensive patient education seems to be effective. For patients with chronic LBP, the effectiveness of individual education is still unclear.

Indexed as

Acute DiseaseHumansLow Back PainPatient Education as TopicRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID18254037
PMCPMC6999124
OpenAlexW1494873001

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.