ArticleEuropean journal of pain (London, England)2015
Can a back pain screening tool help classify patients with acute pain into risk levels for chronic pain?
Article in European journal of pain (London, England), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The clinical course of acute, subacute and persistent low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2024Pooled it
- Predictive Validity of the STarT Back Tool for Risk of Persistent Disabling Back Pain in a U.S. Primary Care Setting.Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation · 2018Trial
- Article
- Development and validation of the PrePain questionnaire for predicting pain.Scientific reports · 2025Observational
- The association of the STarT Back Screening Tool and type of leg pain with low back pain disability trajectories: a prospective cohort study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2024Article
- Multidimensional risk factor analysis of acute low back pain progressing to chronicity: a longitudinal cohort study protocol.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- Development and internal validation of a machine learning prediction model for low back pain non-recovery in patients with an acute episode consulting a physiotherapist in primary care.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2022Article
- Article
- Artificial intelligence to improve back pain outcomes and lessons learnt from clinical classification approaches: three systematic reviews.NPJ digital medicine · 2020Review
- Article
- Article
- Estimating the Risk of Chronic Pain: Development and Validation of a Prognostic Model (PICKUP) for Patients with Acute Low Back Pain.PLoS medicine · 2016Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe 9-item STarT-Back screening tool was developed in primary care patients with low back pain (LBP) to identify those at greatest risk for chronic pain and requiring targeted treatment. We conducted a secondary data analysis study to examine the performance of comparable questionnaire items in a sample of primary care patients with well-defined acute LBP.
methodsIn a prospective cohort study, 605 primary care patients with LBP of less than 30 days answered a questionnaire with 6 items identical and 3 items analogous to the 9-item STarT-Back. Participants were followed up at 6 months and 2 years. STarT-Back rules were applied to classify participant's risk of chronic LBP, and the performance of the screening items in predicting outcomes was assessed using likelihood ratios.
resultsThe proportion of patients with chronic pain at follow-up was considerably lower (6 months: 22%; 2 years: 25%) than in the STarT-Back validation cohort (40%) of patients with pain of any duration. The probability of developing chronic pain given a high-risk designation by items similar to the STarT-Back increased the pre-test probability to 31% and 35%. Likelihood ratios were close to 1.
conclusionsA risk classification schema using the recommended cut-off scores with items similar to the STarT-Back in a primary care population with strictly defined acute LBP had limited ability to identify persons who progressed to chronic pain. The results suggest caution when applying the STarT-Back in patients with acute LBP and a need to consider a modification of its cut-offs.
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.