Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31961900›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Difference between physical therapist estimation and psychological patient-reported outcome measures in patients with low back pain.

Takahiro Miki, Yu Kondo, Tsuneo Takebayashi, Hiroshi Takasaki

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Screening for depression, anxiety, and psychological distress associated with low back pain by musculoskeletal and spinal clinicians. A scoping review.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
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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.

Takahiro MikiDepartment of Rehabilitation, Sapporo Maruyama Orthopedic Hospital, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-0648-2675
Yu KondoDepartment of Rehabilitation, Sapporo Maruyama Orthopedic Hospital, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan.
Tsuneo TakebayashiDepartment of Orthopedic, Sapporo Maruyama Orthopedic Hospital, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan.
Hiroshi TakasakiDepartment of Physical Therapy, Saitama Prefectural University, Koshigaya, Saitama, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-3699-2294
Saitama Prefectural University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Minimizing the number of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) can reduce patient burden. The primary aim of the present study was to investigate whether physical therapists (PTs) can estimate psychological PROM scores in patients with low back pain (LBP) through physical therapy evaluation. The secondary aims were; 1) to investigate whether the clinical experiences of PTs influence correlations between PT estimates and psychological PROM scores, and 2) to investigate the sensitivity and specificity of PT estimates for the psychological features detected by the PROMs. We recruited hospitalized patients owing to LBP, who underwent evaluation by PTs on the initial day of hospitalization. Patients completed PROMs, including the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia, and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale immediately before the initial physical therapy session. PTs rated the magnitude of patient kinesiophobia, pain catastrophizing, anxiety, and depression using an 11-point numerical rating scale (NRS; 0 = not detected at all, 10 = very highly detected) through physical therapy evaluation immediately after the initial session. The PTs were blinded to the PROM results. We categorized PTs into two subgroups (PTs with ≥4 years and those with <4 years of clinical experience). Data from 78 patients (mean [SD] age = 60.5 [16.3] years) and 21 PTs were analyzed. A statistically significant but weak correlation (P = .04, Spearman's ρ = .24) was detected only in the total PCS scores and PT NRS scores in a dataset of all patients and PTs. Further, there were no statistically significant differences in correlations (all P >.05) between the two subgroups of PTs in all measures. Low sensitivity and high specificity of PT estimates for psychological features through physical therapy evaluation were identified in all PROMs when PT NRS scores were categorized into the binary score by 5 (negative: <5; positive: ≥5).

Indexed as

Pain MeasurementPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresPhysical TherapistsAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansJapanLow Back PainMaleMiddle AgedYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID31961900
PMCPMC6974035
OpenAlexW3002310966

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.