Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23661035›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 Society2013

How do low back pain patients conceptualize their expectations regarding treatment? Content analysis of interviews.

T M Haanstra, L Hanson, R Evans, F A van Nes, H C W De Vet, P Cuijpers, R W J G Ostelo

Open access · greenAbstract 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, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Treatment preference changes after exposure to treatment in adults with chronic low back pain.PM & R : the journal of injury, function, and rehabilitation · 2023
    Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. "I know it's changed": a mixed-methods study of the meaning of Global Perceived Effect in chronic neck pain patients.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 · 2014
    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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

T M HaanstraDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics and the EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Centre, Van den Boechorststraat 7, Room A-505, 1081 BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, t.haanstra@vumc.nl.
L Hanson
R Evans
F A van Nes
H C W De Vet
P Cuijpers
R W J G Ostelo
EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research · NLCenter for Clinical Studies · USNorthwestern Health Sciences University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe purpose of this study was to gain insight into how low back pain (LBP) patients conceptualize the construct of expectations regarding treatment.

methodsThis study was nested within a mixed-method randomized clinical trial comparing three primary care interventions for LBP. A total of 77 participants with LBP lasting longer than 6 weeks were included; semi-structured interviews were conducted querying patients about their expectations for treatment. Also factors influencing their expectations were explored. Interviews were administered following enrollment into the study, but prior to study treatment. Two researchers independently conducted a content analysis using NVIVO 9 software.

resultsLBP patients' expectations could be categorized in two main domains: outcome and process expectations, each with subdomains. Patients expressed expectations in all subdomains both as values (what they hoped) and probabilities (what they thought was likely). In multiple subdomains, there were differences in the nature (positive vs. negative) and frequency of value and probability expectations. Participants reported that multiple factors influenced their expectations of which past experience with treatment appeared to be of major influence on probability expectations. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS: This study showed that LBP patients' expectations for treatment are multifaceted. Current measurement instruments do not cover all domains and subdomains of expectations. Therefore, we recommend the development of new or improved measures that make a distinction between value and probability expectations and assess process and/or outcome expectations covering multiple subdomains. Some of the influencing factors found in this study may be useful targets for altering patients' treatment expectations and improving health outcomes.

Indexed as

Patient SatisfactionAdultAttitude to HealthChronic PainFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicLow Back PainMaleMiddle AgedPatient PreferencePrimary Health CareProspective StudiesQualitative Research

Identifiers

PMID23661035
PMCPMC3777054
OpenAlexW2143540592

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.