Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29020989›Full record

ArticleSystematic reviews2017

Predictors of multidisciplinary rehabilitation outcomes in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Elena Tseli, Wilhelmus Johannes Andreas Grooten, Britt-Marie Stålnacke, Katja Boersma, Paul Enthoven, Björn Gerdle, Björn Olov Äng

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Systematic reviews, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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

7 authors.

Elena TseliDepartment of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Division of Physiotherapy, Karolinska Institutet, 23100, 141 83, Huddinge, Sweden. elena.tseli@ki.se.ORCID 0000-0002-8307-259X
Wilhelmus Johannes Andreas GrootenDepartment of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Division of Physiotherapy, Karolinska Institutet, 23100, 141 83, Huddinge, Sweden.
Britt-Marie StålnackeDepartment of Community Medicine and Rehabilitation, Rehabilitation Medicine, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Katja BoersmaSchool of Law, Psychology and Social Work, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden.
Paul EnthovenDepartment of Medical and Health Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Björn GerdlePain and Rehabilitation Centre, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Björn Olov ÄngDepartment of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Division of Physiotherapy, Karolinska Institutet, 23100, 141 83, Huddinge, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundChronic musculoskeletal pain is a major public health problem. Early prediction for optimal treatment results has received growing attention, but there is presently a lack of evidence regarding what information such proactive management should be based on. This study protocol, therefore, presents our planned systematic review and meta-analysis on important predictive factors for health and work-related outcomes following multidisciplinary rehabilitation (MDR) in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain.

methodsWe aim to perform a synthesis of the available evidence together with a meta-analysis of published peer-reviewed original research that includes predictive factors preceding MDR. Included are prospective studies of adults with benign, chronic (> 3 months) musculoskeletal pain diagnoses who have taken part in MDR. In the studies, associations between personal and rehabilitation-based factors and the outcomes of interest are reported. Outcome domains are pain, physical functioning including health-related quality of life, and work ability with follow-ups of 6 months or more. We will use a broad, explorative approach to any presented predictive factors (demographic, symptoms-related, physical, psychosocial, work-related, and MDR-related) and these will be analyzed through (a) narrative synthesis for each outcome domain and (b) if sufficient studies are available, a quantitative synthesis in which variance-weighted pooled proportions will be computed using a random effects model for each outcome domain. The strength of the evidence will be evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation. DISCUSSION: The strength of this systematic review is that it aims for a meta-analysis of prospective cohort or randomized controlled studies by performing an extensive search of multiple databases, using an explorative study approach to predictive factors, rather than building on single predictor impact on the outcome or on predefined hypotheses. In this way, an overview of factors central to MDR outcome can be made and will help strengthen the evidence base and inform a wide readership including health care practitioners and policymakers. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42016025339.

Indexed as

PrognosisQuality of LifeTreatment OutcomeChronic PainDelivery of Health CareHumansMeta-Analysis as TopicMusculoskeletal PainReturn to WorkSystematic Reviews as TopicChronic musculoskeletal painLiterature reviewMeta-analysisMultidisciplinary rehabilitationPrognostic factorsTreatment outcome

Identifiers

PMID29020989
PMCPMC5637325

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.