Commentary on Classification of patients with incident non-specific low back pain: implications for research.

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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

1. State-of-the-Art Personalized Therapy Approaches for Chronic Non-Specific Low Back Pain: Understanding the Mechanisms and Drivers.Pain and therapy · 2025
   Review
2. The effects of an 8-week dynamic neuromuscular stabilization exercise on pain, functional disability, and quality of life in individuals with non-specific chronic low back pain: a randomized clinical trial with a two-month follow-up study.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2024
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Classification of patients with incident non-specific low back pain: implications for research.2016

Authors and funding

1 author.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

Indexed as