Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30891183›Full record

ArticleChiropractic & manual therapies2019

Contrasting real time quantitative measures (weekly SMS) to patients' retrospective appraisal of their one-year's course of low back pain; a probing mixed-methods study.

Lise Hestbaek, Cornelius Myburgh, Henrik Hein Lauridsen, Eleanor Boyle, Alice Kongsted

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Chiropractic & manual therapies, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. 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

5 authors.

Lise Hestbaek1Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-1620-4556
Cornelius Myburgh1Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Henrik Hein Lauridsen1Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Eleanor Boyle1Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Alice Kongsted1Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Due to the recurrent nature of low back pain (LBP), the traditional concepts of cure and recovery are challenged, and investigating the course rather than status at fixed time-points may help us understand prognosis as well as treatment effect. However, methods of frequent measuring still need development and validation. Therefore, this study aims to evaluate the agreement between continuous, quantitative self-assessment (weekly SMS) of the course of LBP over a one-year period and qualitatively derived retrospective patient self-appraisal of the same time-period. Methods: Participants were 32 subjects with LBP from primary care. The quantitative measures consisted of weekly SMS questions for one-year about pain intensity, days with LBP, and activity limitations for that week. For each subject, the weekly responses were graphed and categorized into categories based on intensity, variation and overall change patterns. Qualitative measures were based on semi-structured telephone interviews one-year after a consultation for LBP, where two coders independently categorized the self-appraisal of LBP course into the same predefined categories as the SMS-based trajectories. Furthermore, patients' perceived overall recovery was related to variation patterns from SMS track. Results: There was perfect agreement for 48% in the pain intensity domain, 53% in the variation domain and 63% in the change pattern domain. Most of the discordant cases were classified in neighboring categories with the majority relating to fluctuating patterns. The self-perceived overall recovery status seemed to be reflected quite well by the quantitative measures of pain intensity and days with pain in this study. Conclusion: This study shows that a real time quantitative measure (weekly SMS) and the patient's retrospective appraisal do not fundamentally differ in their reflection of the one-year course of LBP.As a first investigation into this area, these results are promising, as longitudinal quantitatively derived trajectories of LBP seem to reflect the lived experience of the patient to a large degree. Furthermore, the patient's ability to retrospectively recall their one-year course of LBP appears to be quite good. Future studies should focus on refining the categories of trajectories.

Indexed as

Diagnostic Self EvaluationAdultFemaleHumansLow Back PainMaleManipulation, ChiropracticMiddle AgedPain MeasurementPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresPhysical ExaminationPrimary Health CareReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesTime FactorsBack painCourseInterviewMixed methodsRecallSMSTrajectories

Identifiers

PMID30891183
PMCPMC6390359

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.