ArticleRheumatology international2018
Knowledge of features of inflammatory back pain in primary care in the West Midlands: a cross-sectional survey in the United Kingdom.
Article in Rheumatology international, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- How do general practitioners diagnose and refer potential rheumatic musculoskeletal complaints? A scoping review.Clinical rheumatology · 2026Article
- Spondyloarthritis in Latin America: a difficult-to-diagnose challenge.Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease · 2026Review
- The journey of patients with musculoskeletal complaints in Europe: a cross-sectional European survey.Rheumatology international · 2025Article
- Axial spondyloarthritis 10 years on: still looking for the lost tribe.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2020Review
- Clinical features as predictors of histologically confirmed inflammation in patients with lumbar disc herniation with associated radiculopathy.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2020Article
- The Evolving Case Supporting Individualised Physiotherapy for Low Back Pain.Journal of clinical medicine · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
key messagesThere is a relative lack of confidence among GPs in the assessment and management of IBP vs. mechanical back pain. A simple screening tool for SpA, applicable in primary care urgently needs to be developed. It is reasonable for patients with symptoms suggestive of inflammatory back pain to be referred to secondary care without further investigations. The objective of this study was to assess current practice of our local general practitioners (GPs) in using clinical features, as well as radiological and laboratory investigations to assess patients with IBP. An online, observational questionnaire-based survey was done in 10 West Midlands CCGs including disparate geographical and socioeconomic areas. The survey consisted of 23 questions based on Calin, Berlin and ESSG Criteria for spondyloarthropathies. GPs were asked to rate the importance of a range of symptoms as indications of IBP IBP (10 point scale, range 1-10), and what their views were on which were the most important treatments for patients with suspected inflammatory back pain(4 point scale, range 1-4). The 4 most important symptoms for predicting inflammatory back pain according to our local cohort of GPs were 'morning stiffness' 'sleep disturbances caused by back pain' 'insidious onset' and 'age of onset' < 45. Among the treatment options, NSAIDs were ranked as the most important treatment option for IBP. DMARDS were rated as the next most important treatment option, ahead of physiotherapy and anti-TNF therapy. This study has highlighted relative lack of confidence among GPs in the assessment of IBP. Whether this reflects a need for education or poor performance of these questions in primary care populations requires further study.
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.