Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31092664›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2019

MyBackPain-evaluation of an innovative consumer-focused website for low back pain: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

Leanne M Hall, Manuela Ferreira, Jenny Setchell, Simon French, Jessica Kasza, Kim L Bennell, David Hunter, Bill Vicenzino, Chris Dickson, Paul Hodges

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Models of care for managing non-specific low back pain.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
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

10 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Leanne M HallSchool of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Manuela FerreiraInstitute of Bone and Joint Research, University of Sydney, Saint Leonards, New South Wales, Australia.
Jenny SetchellSchool of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Simon FrenchDepartment of Chiropractic, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Jessica KaszaDepartment of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Kim L BennellCHESM, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
David HunterThe University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-3197-752X
Bill VicenzinoPhysiotherapy, The University of Queensland, Queensland, Queensland, Australia.
Chris DicksonArthritis Australia, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Paul HodgesSchool of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
The University of Queensland · AUThe University of Sydney · AUArthritis Australia · AUMacquarie University · AUMonash University · AUThe University of Melbourne · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionDespite the prevalence of low back pain (LBP) worldwide, many people with the condition do not receive evidence-based care or achieve the best possible outcomes. There is a gap in the dissemination of evidence-based information across the globe. The advent of the internet has changed the way people obtain health information. As such, trustworthy, tailored and validated LBP resources may help bridge the gap. This study aims to measure the effectiveness of a new website (MyBackPain) in improving spinal health literacy, treatment preferences and clinical outcomes for people with LBP, in comparison with other online resources. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This online, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial will comprise 440 people with non-specific LBP of any duration. In addition to access to publicly available online information (control group), the intervention group will be given access to the MyBackPain.org.au website. Participants and research staff, including the biostatistician, will be blinded to treatment allocation. Data will be collected at baseline, 1, 3 (primary end-point), 6 and 12 months via online surveys and questionnaires. The primary outcome is spinal health literacy. Secondary outcomes include quality of treatment preferences (stated and observed) and LBP clinical outcomes (pain, disability and quality of life). Analyses will be by intention-to-treat and include outcome data on all randomised participants. Descriptive statistics will be presented for demographic and clinical characteristics. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This trial has been prospectively registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry and has ethical approval from the University of Queensland Human Research Ethics Committee (2017000995). Trial outcomes will be shared via national and international conference presentations and peer-reviewed journal publications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12617001292369; Pre-results.

Indexed as

InternetRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAustraliaConsumer Health InformationHealth LiteracyHealth Services AccessibilityHumansInformation Seeking BehaviorInformation ServicesLow Back PainPatient Education as TopicPragmatic Clinical Trials as TopicProgram EvaluationProspective Studieshealth literacyinternet resourceslow back pain

Identifiers

PMID31092664
PMCPMC6530319
OpenAlexW2945159871

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.