Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31034102›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of pain (London, England)2019

Expectations influence treatment outcomes in patients with low back pain. A secondary analysis of data from a randomized clinical trial.

Andreas Eklund, Diana De Carvalho, Isabelle Pagé, Arnold Wong, Melker S Johansson, Katherine A Pohlman, Jan Hartvigsen, Michael Swain

Open access · hybridAbstract 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 32 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 70 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors at 8 institutions in 6 countries.

Andreas EklundUnit of Intervention and Implementation Research for Worker Health, The Institute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Diana De CarvalhoDiscipline of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada.
Isabelle PagéDepartment of Anatomy, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, Trois-Rivières, Québec, Canada.
Arnold WongDepartment of Rehabilitation Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Melker S JohanssonDepartment of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Katherine A PohlmanResearch Institute, Parker University, Dallas, Texas.
Jan HartvigsenDepartment of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Michael SwainDepartment of Chiropractic, Faculty of Science and Engineering, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.
Hong Kong Polytechnic University · HKInstitute for Musculoskeletal Health · AUKarolinska Institutet · SEMemorial University of Newfoundland · CANational Research Centre for the Working Environment · DKNordisk Institut for Kiropraktik og Klinisk Biomekanik · DKParker University · USUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLow back pain (LBP) is a global public health challenge, which causes high healthcare costs and the highest burden on society in terms of years lived with disability. While patients' expectations for improvement may have effects on LBP treatment outcomes, it remains unclear if psychological profiles modify this relationship. Therefore, the objectives of this study were to investigate if (a) patients' expectations predicted short-term outcome, and (b) psychological profile, pain intensity and self-rated health modified the relationship between expectations and outcome.

methodsData were collected between April 2012 and January 2016 during the inclusion into a randomized controlled trial. Potentially eligible participants were identified through 40 chiropractic clinics located across Sweden. Patients' expectations, psychological profile, pain intensity, activity limitation and self-rated health were collected from patients with recurrent persistent LBP during their first chiropractic visit (n = 593). Subjective improvement was measured at the fourth visit.

resultsPatients with a high expectation of improvement had 58% higher risk to report an improvement at the fourth visit (RR = 1.58, 95% CI: 1.28, 1.95). Controlling for potential confounders only slightly decreased the strength of this association (RR = 1.49, 95% CI: 1.20, 1.86). Baseline pain intensity, psychological profile and self-rated health did not modify the effect of expectation on outcome.

conclusionsBaseline patients' expectations play an important role when predicting LBP treatment outcomes. Clinicians should consider and address patients' expectations at the first visit to best inform prognosis. SIGNIFICANCE: This study confirms the importance of patients' expectations in a clinical setting. Patients' expectations predict the short-term outcome of chiropractic care for LBP. Pain intensity, psychological profile and self-rated health did not modify this relationship.

Indexed as

AdultFemaleHealth Care CostsHumansLow Back PainMaleManipulation, ChiropracticMiddle AgedMotivationPain MeasurementPrognosisRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID31034102
PMCPMC6767754
OpenAlexW2943258756

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.