Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29882614›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of pain (London, England)2019

Drivers of international variation in prevalence of disabling low back pain: Findings from the Cultural and Psychosocial Influences on Disability study.

D Coggon, G Ntani, K T Palmer, V E Felli, F Harari, L A Quintana, S A Felknor, M Rojas, A Cattrell, S Vargas-Prada and 11 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of pain (London, England), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Estimating population burdens of occupational disease.Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health · 2022
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

21 authors.

D CoggonMedical Research Council Lifecourse Epidemiology Unit, University of Southampton, UK.
G NtaniMedical Research Council Lifecourse Epidemiology Unit, University of Southampton, UK.
K T PalmerMedical Research Council Lifecourse Epidemiology Unit, University of Southampton, UK.
V E FelliSchool of Nursing, University of São Paulo, Brazil.
F HarariCorporación para el Desarrollo de la Producción y el Medio Ambiente Laboral - IFA (Institute for the Development of Production and the Work Environment), Quito, Ecuador.
L A QuintanaDepartment of Industrial Engineering, School of Engineering, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Bogotá, Colombia.
S A FelknorSouthwest Center for Occupational and Environmental Health, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston School of Public Health, TX, USA.
M RojasProgram Health, Work and Environment in Central America, Institute for Studies on Toxic Substances (IRET), National University of Costa Rica, Heredia, Costa Rica.
A CattrellNorth East London NHS Foundation Trust, Goodmayes Hospital, Ilford, Essex, UK.
S Vargas-PradaCenter for Research in Occupational Health (CiSAL), Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain.
M BonziniDepartment of Clinical Sciences and Community Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy.
E SolidakiDepartment of Social Medicine, Medical School, University of Crete, Heraklion, Greece.
E MerisaluInstitute of Technology, Estonian University of Life Sciences, Tartu, Estonia.
R R HabibDepartment of Environmental Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, American University of Beirut, Lebanon.
F SadeghianDepartment of Occupational Health, School of Public Health, Shahroud University of Medical Sciences, Shahroud, Iran.
M M KadirDepartment of Community Health Sciences, Aga Khan University, Karachi, Pakistan.
S S P WarnakulasuriyaDepartment of Allied Health Sciences, Faculty of Medical Sciences, University of Sri Jayawardenepura, Gangodawila, Nugegoda, Sri Lanka.
K MatsudairaDepartment for Medical Research and Management for Musculoskeletal Pain, 22nd Century Medical and Research Center, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Tokyo Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
B Nyantumbu-MkhizeNational Institute for Occupational Health, National Health Laboratory Service, Johannesburg, South Africa.
H L KelsallDepartment of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Vic., Australia.
H HarcombeDepartment of Preventive and Social Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.

Funding

Arthritis Research UKMedical Research Council G0400490Medical Research Council MC_PC_15015Medical Research Council MC_UP_A620_1018Medical Research Council MC_UU_12011/5NIH HHS
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWide international variation in the prevalence of disabling low back pain (LBP) among working populations is not explained by known risk factors. It would be useful to know whether the drivers of this variation are specific to the spine or factors that predispose to musculoskeletal pain more generally.

methodsBaseline information about musculoskeletal pain and risk factors was elicited from 11 710 participants aged 20-59 years, who were sampled from 45 occupational groups in 18 countries. Wider propensity to pain was characterized by the number of anatomical sites outside the low back that had been painful in the 12 months before baseline ('pain propensity index'). After a mean interval of 14 months, 9055 participants (77.3%) provided follow-up data on disabling LBP in the past month. Baseline risk factors for disabling LBP at follow-up were assessed by random intercept Poisson regression.

resultsAfter allowance for other known and suspected risk factors, pain propensity showed the strongest association with disabling LBP (prevalence rate ratios up to 2.6, 95% CI: 2.2-3.1; population attributable fraction 39.8%). Across the 45 occupational groups, the prevalence of disabling LBP varied sevenfold (much more than within-country differences between nurses and office workers), and correlated with mean pain propensity index (r = 0.58).

conclusionsWithin our study, major international variation in the prevalence of disabling LBP appeared to be driven largely by factors predisposing to musculoskeletal pain at multiple anatomical sites rather than by risk factors specific to the spine. SIGNIFICANCE: Our findings indicate that differences in general propensity to musculoskeletal pain are a major driver of large international variation in the prevalence of disabling low back pain among people of working age.

Indexed as

Activities of Daily LivingInternationalityAdultFemaleHumansLow Back PainMaleMiddle AgedMusculoskeletal PainOccupational DiseasesPrevalenceRegression AnalysisRisk FactorsYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID29882614
PMCPMC6492178

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.