Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27217287›Full record

Trial reportBMJ open2016

TOPS: Trial Of Prevention Strategies for low back pain in patients recently recovered from low back pain-study rationale and protocol.

Matthew L Stevens, Chung-Wei C Lin, Mark J Hancock, Jane Latimer, Rachelle Buchbinder, Margreth Grotle, Maurits van Tulder, Charles H New, Trish Wisby-Roth, Chris G Maher

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled TrialPragmatic Clinical Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Models of care for managing non-specific low back pain.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. 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

10 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Matthew L StevensMusculoskeletal Division, The George Institute for Global Health, Sydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-2621-4811
Chung-Wei C LinMusculoskeletal Division, The George Institute for Global Health, Sydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Mark J HancockFaculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Jane LatimerMusculoskeletal Division, The George Institute for Global Health, Sydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Rachelle BuchbinderMonash Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Cabrini Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Margreth GrotleOslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, Oslo/FORMI, Oslo University Hospital Norway, Oslo, Norway.
Maurits van TulderDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Earth & Life Sciences, VU University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Charles H NewNepean Clinical School, Sydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Trish Wisby-RothBounce Back Active Rehabilitation Systems, Sydney, Australia.
Chris G MaherMusculoskeletal Division, The George Institute for Global Health, Sydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
The University of Sydney · AUAmsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NLCabrini Hospital · AUMacquarie University · AUOslo University Hospital · NORoyal Rehabilitation Centre · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionLow back pain (LBP) is the health condition that carries the greatest disability burden worldwide; however, there is only modest support for interventions to prevent LBP. The aim of this trial is to establish the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of group-based exercise and educational classes compared with a minimal intervention control in preventing recurrence of LBP in people who have recently recovered from an episode of LBP. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: TOPS will be a pragmatic comparative effectiveness randomised clinical trial with a parallel economic evaluation combining three separate cohorts (TOPS Workers, TOPS Primary Care, TOPS Defence) with the same methodology. 1482 participants who have recently recovered from LBP will be randomised to either a comprehensive exercise and education programme or a minimal intervention control. Participants will be followed up for a minimum of 1 year. The primary outcome will be days till recurrence of LBP. Effectiveness will be assessed using survival analysis. Cost-effectiveness will be assessed from the societal perspective. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This trial has been approved by the University of Sydney Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) (ref: 2015/728) and prospectively registered with the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ref: 12615000939594). We will also obtain ethics approval from the Australian Defence Force HREC. The results of this study will be submitted for publication in a prominent journal and widely publicised in the general media. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry (ANZCTR) 12615000939594.

Indexed as

Patient Education as TopicAdultAgedCost-Benefit AnalysisExercise TherapyFemaleHumansLow Back PainMaleMiddle AgedPatient ComplianceSample Sizeeducationexercisepreventionrandomised clinical trial

Identifiers

PMID27217287
PMCPMC4885430
OpenAlexW2401656349

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.