Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28346472›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2017

Can group-based reassuring information alter low back pain behavior? A cluster-randomized controlled trial.

Pernille Frederiksen, Aage Indahl, Lars L Andersen, Kim Burton, Rasmus Hertzum-Larsen, Tom Bendix

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Models of care for managing non-specific low back pain.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Advice to remain active with arm pain reduces disability.Occupational medicine (Oxford, England) · 2023
    Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Should musicians play in pain?British journal of pain · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

6 authors.

Pernille FrederiksenCopenhagen Center for Back Research (COPE BACK), Centre for Rheumatology and Spine Diseases, Glostrup, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9528-0735
Aage IndahlUni Health, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Lars L AndersenNational Research Centre for the Working Environment, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Kim BurtonCentre for Applied Psychological and Health Research, University of Huddersfield, Huddersfield, United Kingdom.
Rasmus Hertzum-LarsenDanish Cancer Society Research and Data, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Tom BendixCopenhagen Center for Back Research (COPE BACK), Centre for Rheumatology and Spine Diseases, Glostrup, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLow back pain (LBP) is common in the population and multifactorial in nature, often involving negative consequences. Reassuring information to improve coping is recommended for reducing the negative consequences of LBP. Adding a simple non-threatening explanation for the pain (temporary muscular dysfunction) has been successful at altering beliefs and behavior when delivered with other intervention elements. This study investigates the isolated effect of this specific information on future occupational behavior outcomes when delivered to the workforce.

designA cluster-randomized controlled trial.

methodsPublically employed workers (n = 505) from 11 Danish municipality centers were randomized at center-level (cluster) to either intervention (two 1-hour group-based talks at the workplace) or control. The talks provided reassuring information together with a simple non-threatening explanation for LBP-the 'functional-disturbance'-model. Data collections took place monthly over a 1-year period using text message tracking (SMS). Primary outcomes were self-reported days of cutting down usual activities and work participation. Secondary outcomes were self-reported back beliefs, work ability, number of healthcare visits, bothersomeness, restricted activity, use of pain medication, and sadness/depression.

resultsThere was no between-group difference in the development of LBP during follow-up. Cumulative logistic regression analyses showed no between-group difference on days of cutting down activities, but increased odds for more days of work participation in the intervention group (OR = 1.83 95% CI: 1.08-3.12). Furthermore, the intervention group was more likely to report: higher work ability, reduced visits to healthcare professionals, lower bothersomeness, lower levels of sadness/depression, and positive back beliefs.

conclusionReassuring information involving a simple non-threatening explanation for LBP significantly increased the odds for days of work participation and higher work ability among workers who went on to experience LBP during the 12-month follow-up. Our results confirm the potential for public-health education for LBP, and add to the discussion of simple versus multidisciplinary interventions.

Indexed as

Health EducationAdaptation, PsychologicalAdultDenmarkEfficiencyFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansLow Back PainMaleMiddle AgedOdds RatioSelf ReportSick LeaveWorkplace

Identifiers

PMID28346472
PMCPMC5367686

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.