Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22752591›Full record

Trial reportEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2012

Agreement of self-reported items and clinically assessed nerve root involvement (or sciatica) in a primary care setting.

Kika Konstantinou, Martyn Lewis, Kate M Dunn

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report 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, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 35% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kika KonstantinouArthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Primary Care Sciences, Keele University, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK. k.konstantinou@cphc.keele.ac.uk
Martyn Lewis
Kate M Dunn
Keele University · GBVersus Arthritis · GB

Funding

Department of Health RP-PG-0707-10131Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionWe analysed baseline measures from an RCT involving adults with low back pain (LBP) with or without referred leg pain, to identify self-report items that best identified clinically determined nerve root involvement (sciatica).

methodsPotential indicators of nerve root involvement were gathered using a self-reported questionnaire. Participants underwent a standardised physical examination on the same day as questionnaire completion. Self-reported items were compared to a reference standard (clinical diagnosis) using sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, likelihood ratios (LRs), the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and logistic regression. Two reference standards are presented: one based on a clinical diagnosis of nerve root problems and excluding possible/inconclusive cases (referred to as a confirmatory reference), and the other being inclusive of possible/inconclusive cases (referred to as an indicative reference).

resultsPain below knee was the best single item for diagnostic accuracy with an area under curve (AUC) of 0.67-0.68, which however is slightly less than the 'acceptable discrimination'. A cluster of three items, including distribution of pain below the knee, leg pain that is worse than back pain, and feeling of numbness or pins and needles in the leg, did improve discrimination to an 'acceptable' level with an AUC of 0.72-0.74 in relation to confirmatory and indicative references, respectively. However, the likelihood ratios from the models were reflective of a 'small' amount of discrimination.

conclusionIn this primary care population seeking treatment for LBP with or without leg pain, we found no clear set of self-report items that accurately identified patients with nerve root pain. When accurate case definition is important, clinical assessment should be the method of choice for identifying LBP with possible nerve root involvement.

Indexed as

Self ReportAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansLow Back PainMaleMiddle AgedPhysical Therapy ModalitiesRadiculopathySciaticaYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID22752591
PMCPMC3481089
OpenAlexW2019100322

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.