ArticleBioMed research international2013
The value of pain coping constructs in subcategorising back pain patients according to risk of poor outcome.
Article in BioMed research international, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Changes in Pain Self-Efficacy, Coping Skills, and Fear-Avoidance Beliefs in a Randomized Controlled Trial of Yoga, Physical Therapy, and Education for Chronic Low Back Pain.Pain medicine (Malden, Mass.) · 2022Trial
- The Relationship between Pain Catastrophizing and Cognitive Function in Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain: A Scoping Review.Pain research & management · 2023Article
- Predictors of response following standardized education and self-management recommendations for low back pain stratified by dominant pain location.North American Spine Society journal · 2021Article
- Back pain in Poland and Germany: a survey of prevalence and association with demographic characters.BioMed research international · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSubcategorising patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) could improve patient outcomes and facilitate prioritisation of treatment resources.
objectiveThis study aimed to develop a subcategorising method for individuals with CLBP using the Coping Strategies Questionnaire 24 (CSQ24) and to investigate the methods potential validity.
methods196 patients were recruited from a physiotherapy outpatients department. All participants completed a battery of questionnaires before and after treatment including the CSQ24 and a measure of pain, disability, and mood. At discharge participants also completed a global subjective outcomes scale consisting of a 6-point Likert scale. All participants received usual physiotherapy.
resultsCut-off values for the CSQ24 were calculated using triangulation of the findings from three different statistical methods. Cut-off values were identified for the Catastrophising and Cognitive Coping subscales of the CSQ24. Participants were categorised into low, medium, and high risk of a poor outcome. The cut-off values for these were ≥21 on Cognitive Coping and ≤9 on Catastrophising for low risk and ≤15 on Cognitive Coping for high risk, with all other patients being classified as being at moderate risk.
conclusionFurther validation is required before this approach can be recommended for clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.