Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31113734›Full record

ReviewBrazilian journal of physical therapy

Overall confidence in the results of systematic reviews on exercise therapy for chronic low back pain: a cross-sectional analysis using the Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) 2 tool.

Matheus Oliveira Almeida, Tiê Parma Yamato, Patricia do Carma Silva Parreira, Leonardo Oliveira Pena Costa, Steven Kamper, Bruno Tirotti Saragiotto

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Brazilian journal of physical therapy. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 15 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 15 pooled it
–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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 15 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Exercise therapy for chronic low back pain.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021
    Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Review
  17. Real-world two-year durability of restorative neurostimulation for treatment of multifidus dysfunction in patients with chronic low back pain: an observational German cohort study.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026
    Observational
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

6 authors.

Matheus Oliveira AlmeidaMasters and Doctoral Programs in Physical Therapy, Universidade Cidade de São Paulo, Rua Cesário Galeno 448, Tatuapé, São Paulo, SP CEP 03071-000, Brazil. Electronic address: mathewsalmeida@hotmail.com.
Tiê Parma YamatoSydney School of Public Health, Sydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, PO Box M179 Missenden Rd, Sydney, NSW 2050, Australia.
Patricia do Carma Silva ParreiraSydney School of Public Health, Sydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, PO Box M179 Missenden Rd, Sydney, NSW 2050, Australia.
Leonardo Oliveira Pena CostaMasters and Doctoral Programs in Physical Therapy, Universidade Cidade de São Paulo, Rua Cesário Galeno 448, Tatuapé, São Paulo, SP CEP 03071-000, Brazil.
Steven KamperSydney School of Public Health, Sydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, PO Box M179 Missenden Rd, Sydney, NSW 2050, Australia.
Bruno Tirotti SaragiottoMasters and Doctoral Programs in Physical Therapy, Universidade Cidade de São Paulo, Rua Cesário Galeno 448, Tatuapé, São Paulo, SP CEP 03071-000, Brazil; Sydney School of Public Health, Sydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, PO Box M179 Missenden Rd, Sydney, NSW 2050, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the overall confidence in the results of systematic reviews of exercise therapy for chronic non-specific low back pain using the AMSTAR 2 tool.

methodsPubMed, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, PEDro and CINAHL was searched up to February 2017. Two independent reviewers selected systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials that investigated exercise therapy in patients with low back pain. AMSTAR 2 assessment was performed by pairs of reviewers, and the overall confidence in the results of the systematic reviews were rated as 'High', 'Moderate', 'Low' and 'Critically low'. Descriptive analysis was used to summarize the characteristics of included systematic reviews. The percentage of systematic reviews achieving each item from the AMSTAR 2 and the overall confidence in the results were tabulated.

resultsThe search identified 38 systematic reviews. Most of the reviews included a median of 10 clinical trials and total sample size of 813 participants per review. Five of 38 (13%) reviews were Cochrane reviews, and 8 (21%) systematic reviews had a protocol published or registered prospectively. The overall confidence in the results of 28 reviews (74%) was rated as 'Critically low', 6 (16%) as 'Low', 1 (2%) as Moderate, while 3 of 38 reviews (8%) were rated as 'High'.

conclusionThe results demonstrate very low confidence in the results of most systematic reviews of exercise in chronic non-specific low back pain. Clinicians are more likely to deliver the most efficacious interventions to patients by critically appraising systematic reviews using AMSTAR 2 before making their decisions.

Indexed as

Cross-Sectional StudiesExercise TherapyHumansLow Back PainDecision-makingMethodological qualityMusculoskeletal painPhysical therapy

Identifiers

PMID31113734
PMCPMC7082685

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.