ArticleJournal of pain research2017
Estimated risk for chronic pain determined using the generic STarT Back 5-item screening tool.
Article in Journal of pain research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- How Well Do Seven Self-Report Measures Represent Underlying Back Pain Impact?Pain management nursing : official journal of the American Society of Pain Management Nurses · 2024Article
- Clinical Characteristics of Predominantly Unilateral Oral Cenesthopathy With and Without Neurovascular Contact.Frontiers in neurology · 2021Article
- Differences in the Clinical Characteristics of Persistent Idiopathic Facial Pain (Atypical Odontalgia) Patients with or Without Neurovascular Compression of the Trigeminal Nerve.Pain medicine (Malden, Mass.) · 2020Article
- Measuring biopsychosocial risk for back pain disability in chiropractic patients using the STarT back screening tool: a cross-sectional survey.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2019Article
- Survey on chronic disabling low back pain among care workers at nursing care facilities: a multicenter collaborative cross-sectional study.Journal of pain research · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe generic STarT Back 5-item screening tool (STarT-G) is used to manage chronic pain in the lower back and elsewhere. This study evaluated the validity of the Japanese version of this generic screening tool. MATERIALS AND
methodsJapanese participants between the ages of 20 and 64 years completed online surveys regarding pain. Survey reliability was assessed with internal consistency, as calculated using Cronbach's alpha coefficients. Spearman's correlation coefficients were used to evaluate concurrent validity between the STarT-G score and standard reference questionnaires. Associations between STarT-G scores and the presence of a disability due to chronic pain (DCP) were analyzed using receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves.
resultsAnalyses ultimately included data obtained from 52,842 Japanese participants (54.4% male) with a mean (standard deviation) age of 47.7 (9.4) years. Approximately 1.5% of participants had DCP, and the mean STarT-G score was 1.2 (1.4). The Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.71, indicating an acceptable reliability. The STarT-G score moderately correlated with the pain numerical rating scale (NRS) score (Spearman's correlation coefficient:
conclusionThe STarT-G was internally consistent and was able to distinguish between subjects with and without a DCP. Therefore, the STarT-G can reliably be used in the Japanese population to identify patients with DCP.
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.