Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31841078›Full record

Trial reportSports health

Comparing the Effectiveness of Cognitive Functional Treatment and Lumbar Stabilization Treatment on Pain and Movement Control in Patients With Low Back Pain.

Behrouz Khodadad, Amir Letafatkar, Malihe Hadadnezhad, Sadredin Shojaedin

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Sports health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Sensory integration strategies on repeated postural stability and neuromuscular adaptation in individuals with low back pain.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 · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. The Components of Lumbar Motor Control Are Not Inter-related.Journal of musculoskeletal & neuronal interactions · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Interventions for the Management of Acute and Chronic Low Back Pain: Revision 2021.The Journal of orthopaedic and sports physical therapy · 2021
    Article
  19. Efficacy of Core Stability in Non-Specific Chronic Low Back Pain.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2021
    Review
  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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Behrouz KhodadadFaculty of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, Department of Biomechanics and Sport Injuries, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Republic of Iran.
Amir LetafatkarFaculty of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, Department of Biomechanics and Sport Injuries, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Republic of Iran.
Malihe HadadnezhadFaculty of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, Department of Biomechanics and Sport Injuries, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Republic of Iran.
Sadredin ShojaedinFaculty of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, Department of Biomechanics and Sport Injuries, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Republic of Iran.
Kharazmi University · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe treatment of chronic low back pain (LBP) should target both behavioral variables and physical performance factors. HYPOTHESIS: Cognitive functional treatment (CFT) and lumbar stabilization treatment (LST) will result in positive changes in pain and lumbar movement control (LMC) in patients with LBP. STUDY

designPretest-posttest intervention. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3.

methodsAfter screening, 52 participants (mean age, 44.3 ± 2.46 years) with chronic LBP were allocated into CFT (n = 17), LST (n = 17), or control (n = 18) groups. Pain and LMC were evaluated before and after 8 weeks of intervention with visual analog scale (VAS) and Luomajoki LMC battery tests, respectively.

resultsCompared with baseline, pain and LMC were reduced and improved significantly in both groups after 8 weeks. However, the changes in both variables were not significantly different between groups. Percent change for pain between pretest and posttest values in the LST group was a decrease of 45% (

conclusionBoth CFT and LST groups improved LMC scores and reduced pain intensity. However, there was no difference between the 2 experimental groups on pain and LMC test results. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: In this study, intended to construct an intervention for people with chronic LBP, the primary aims were to help individuals "make sense of their pain," develop effective pain control strategies via body relaxation and extinction of safety behaviors, and adopt healthy lifestyle behaviors to affect cognitive factors known to affect pain sensitivity and disability. These primary aims were achieved through an emphasis on factors such as development of positive beliefs, reduced fear, increased awareness, enhanced understanding and control of pain, adaptive coping, enhanced self-efficacy, confidence, and improved mood through the class-based intervention.

Indexed as

Cognitive Behavioral TherapyExercise TherapyAdaptation, PsychologicalAdultAffectChronic PainFearHumansLow Back PainLumbosacral RegionMaleMiddle AgedMovementSelf Efficacyback paincognitive therapyeducationlumbar movement controllumbar stabilization treatment

Identifiers

PMID31841078
PMCPMC7222662
OpenAlexW2995485571

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.