Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31765487›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2019

Individual recovery expectations and prognosis of outcomes in non-specific low back pain: prognostic factor review.

Jill A Hayden, Maria N Wilson, Richard D Riley, Ross Iles, Tamar Pincus, Rachel Ogilvie

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 101 papers, 26 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
101citing papers in PubMed, 26 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

101 citing papers in PubMed, 26 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. The clinical course of acute, subacute and persistent low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2024
    Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Prognosis of adults and children following a first unprovoked seizure.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023
    Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Overall prognosis of preschool autism spectrum disorder diagnoses.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022
    Pooled it
  16. Biopsychosocial Factors for Chronicity in Individuals with Non-Specific Low Back Pain: An Umbrella Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Pooled it
  17. Cytokines and Venous Leg Ulcer Healing-A Systematic Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Pooled it
  18. Work-family trajectories and health: A systematic review.Advances in life course research · 2022
    Pooled it
  19. Pooled it
  20. Pooled it

41 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Jill A HaydenDalhousie University, Department of Community Health & Epidemiology, 5790 University Avenue, Room 403, Halifax, NS, Canada, B3H 1V7.
Maria N WilsonDalhousie University, Department of Community Health and Epidemiology, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Richard D RileyKeele University, School of Primary, Community and Social Care, David Weatherall Building, Keele University Campus, Keele, Staffordshire, UK, ST5 5BG.
Ross IlesMonash University, Department of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Peninsula Campus, Frankston, Victoria, Australia, 3199.
Tamar PincusRoyal Holloway University of London, Department of Psychology, Egham, Surrey, UK, TW20 0EX.
Rachel OgilvieDalhousie University, Community Health & Epidemiology, 5760 University Avenue, Halifax, Canada, B3H 1V7.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLow back pain is costly and disabling. Prognostic factor evidence can help healthcare providers and patients understand likely prognosis, inform the development of prediction models to identify subgroups, and may inform new treatment strategies. Recent studies have suggested that people who have poor expectations for recovery experience more back pain disability, but study results have differed.

objectivesTo synthesise evidence on the association between recovery expectations and disability outcomes in adults with low back pain, and explore sources of heterogeneity. SEARCH

methodsThe search strategy included broad and focused electronic searches of MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and PsycINFO to 12 March 2019, reference list searches of relevant reviews and included studies, and citation searches of relevant expectation measurement tools. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included low back pain prognosis studies from any setting assessing general, self-efficacy, and treatment expectations (measured dichotomously and continuously on a 0 - 10 scale), and their association with work participation, clinically important recovery, functional limitations, or pain intensity outcomes at short (3 months), medium (6 months), long (12 months), and very long (> 16 months) follow-up. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted study characteristics and all reported estimates of unadjusted and adjusted associations between expectations and related outcomes. Two review authors independently assessed risks of bias using the Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool. We conducted narrative syntheses and meta-analyses when appropriate unadjusted or adjusted estimates were available. Two review authors independently graded and reported the overall quality of evidence. MAIN

resultsWe screened 4635 unique citations to include 60 studies (30,530 participants). Thirty-five studies were conducted in Europe, 21 in North America, and four in Australia. Study populations were mostly chronic (37%), from healthcare (62%) or occupational settings (26%). General expectation was the most common type of recovery expectation measured (70%); 16 studies measured more than one type of expectation. Usable data for syntheses were available for 52 studies (87% of studies; 28,885 participants). We found moderate-quality evidence that positive recovery expectations are strongly associated with better work participation (narrative synthesis: 21 studies; meta-analysis: 12 studies, 4777 participants: odds ratio (OR) 2.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.64 to 3.62), and low-quality evidence for clinically important recovery outcomes (narrative synthesis: 12 studies; meta-analysis: 5 studies, 1820 participants: OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.49 to 2.41), both at follow-up times closest to 12 months, using adjusted data. The association of recovery expectations with other outcomes of interest, including functional limitations (narrative synthesis: 10 studies; meta-analysis: 3 studies, 1435 participants: OR 1.40, 95% CI 0.85 to 2.31) and pain intensity (narrative synthesis: 9 studies; meta-analysis: 3 studies, 1555 participants: OR 1.15, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.23) outcomes at follow-up times closest to 12 months using adjusted data, is less certain, achieving very low- and low-quality evidence, respectively. No studies reported statistically significant or clinically important negative associations between recovery expectations and any low back pain outcome. AUTHORS'

conclusionsWe found that individual recovery expectations are probably strongly associated with future work participation (moderate-quality evidence) and may be associated with clinically important recovery outcomes (low-quality evidence). The association of recovery expectations with other outcomes of interest is less certain. Our findings suggest that recovery expectations should be considered in future studies, to improve prognosis and management of low back pain.

Indexed as

MotivationAdultChronic PainHumansLow Back PainPain MeasurementPrognosisRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID31765487
PMCPMC6877336

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.