ArticleTrials2018
The effectiveness of a stratified care model for non-specific low back pain in Danish primary care compared to current practice: study protocol of a randomised controlled trial.
Article in Trials, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02612467 (The Effectiveness of a Stratified Care Model for Non-specific Low Back Pain in Danish Primary Care Compared to Current Practice in a Randomised Controlled Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
The Effectiveness of a Stratified Care Model for Non-specific Low Back Pain in Danish Primary Care Compared to Current Practice in a Randomised Controlled Trial
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Models of care for managing non-specific low back pain.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Effectiveness of stratified treatment for back pain in Danish primary care: A randomized controlled trial.European journal of pain (London, England) · 2021Trial
- Patients' Views on the Implementation Potential of a Stratified Treatment Approach for Low Back Pain in Germany: A Qualitative Study.Health services insights · 2020Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPrior studies indicate that stratified care for low back pain results in better clinical outcome and reduced costs in healthcare compared to current practice. Stratified care may be associated with clinical benefits for patients with low back pain at a lower cost, but evidence is sparse. Hence this study aims to evaluate the clinical effects and cost-effectiveness of stratified care in patients with non-specific low back pain compared to current practice. METHODS/
designThe study is a two-armed randomised controlled trial in primary care in the Regions of Southern and Central Denmark (2.5 million citizens). Patients with non-specific low back will be recruited by paticpating GPs. Patients are randomised to either (1) stratified care or (2) current practice at participating physiotherapy clinics. In the stratified care arm, the intervention is based on the patient's STarT Back Tool classification and trained accordingly, whereas physiotherapists in the current pratice arm are blinded to the STarT score. Primary outcomes in the trial will be group differences in time off work, improvement in LBP disability measured by the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) and patient-reported global change. Secondary measures will be pain intensity, patient satisfaction, data on patient healthcare resource utilisation and quality-adjusted life year based on the EQ-5D-5L. DISCUSSION: Stratified care that effectively targets treatment to relevant sub-groups of patients has potentially great impact on the treatment pathways of low back pain. Thus, if effective, this could result in better patient outcomes and at the same time reduce the costs for treatment of low back pain.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov , NCT02612467 . Registered on 16 November 2015.
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.