Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28143458›Full record

Observational studyBMC musculoskeletal disorders2017

Identifying subgroups of patients using latent class analysis: should we use a single-stage or a two-stage approach? A methodological study using a cohort of patients with low back pain.

Anne Molgaard Nielsen, Peter Kent, Lise Hestbaek, Werner Vach, Alice Kongsted

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Pain Phenotypes in Endometriosis: A Population-Based Study Using Latent Class Analysis.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Observational
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

5 authors.

Anne Molgaard NielsenDepartment of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, 5230, Odense M, Denmark. amnielsen@health.sdu.dk.
Peter KentDepartment of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, 5230, Odense M, Denmark.
Lise HestbaekDepartment of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, 5230, Odense M, Denmark.
Werner VachInstitute for Medical Biometry and Statistics, Faculty of Medicine and Medical Center - University of Freiburg, 79104, Freiburg, Germany.
Alice KongstedDepartment of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, 5230, Odense M, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHeterogeneity in patients with low back pain (LBP) is well recognised and different approaches to subgrouping have been proposed. Latent Class Analysis (LCA) is a statistical technique that is increasingly being used to identify subgroups based on patient characteristics. However, as LBP is a complex multi-domain condition, the optimal approach when using LCA is unknown. Therefore, this paper describes the exploration of two approaches to LCA that may help improve the identification of clinically relevant and interpretable LBP subgroups.

methodsFrom 928 LBP patients consulting a chiropractor, baseline data were used as input to the statistical subgrouping. In a single-stage LCA, all variables were modelled simultaneously to identify patient subgroups. In a two-stage LCA, we used the latent class membership from our previously published LCA within each of six domains of health (activity, contextual factors, pain, participation, physical impairment and psychology) (first stage) as the variables entered into the second stage of the two-stage LCA to identify patient subgroups. The description of the results of the single-stage and two-stage LCA was based on a combination of statistical performance measures, qualitative evaluation of clinical interpretability (face validity) and a subgroup membership comparison.

resultsFor the single-stage LCA, a model solution with seven patient subgroups was preferred, and for the two-stage LCA, a nine patient subgroup model. Both approaches identified similar, but not identical, patient subgroups characterised by (i) mild intermittent LBP, (ii) recent severe LBP and activity limitations, (iii) very recent severe LBP with both activity and participation limitations, (iv) work-related LBP, (v) LBP and several negative consequences and (vi) LBP with nerve root involvement.

conclusionsBoth approaches identified clinically interpretable patient subgroups. The potential importance of these subgroups needs to be investigated by exploring whether they can be identified in other cohorts and by examining their possible association with patient outcomes. This may inform the selection of a preferred LCA approach.

Indexed as

AdultCohort StudiesCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansLow Back PainMaleMiddle AgedStatistics as TopicClassificationData miningLatent class analysisLow back painSubgrouping

Identifiers

PMID28143458
PMCPMC5286735

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.