Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33253233›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2020

The strength of association between psychological factors and clinical outcome in tendinopathy: A systematic review.

Carl Stubbs, Sean Mc Auliffe, Adrian Mallows, Kieran O'sullivan, Terence Haines, Peter Malliaras

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Injury-related psychological distress and the association with perceived running ability in injured runners.Physical therapy in sport : official journal of the Association of Chartered Physiotherapists in Sports Medicine · 2022
    Article
  9. Biopsychosocial approach to tendinopathy.BMJ open sport & exercise medicine · 2022
    Review
  10. 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

6 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Carl StubbsSunshine Coast Hospital Health Service, Monash University, Queensland, Australia.
Sean Mc AuliffeDepartment of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation Sciences, College of health Sciences, Qatar University, Doha, Qatar.ORCID 0000-0002-8716-5005
Adrian MallowsSchool of Health and Human Sciences, University of Essex, Colchester, United Kingdom.
Kieran O'sullivanDepartment of Allied Health, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland.
Terence HainesDepartment of Physiotherapy, School of Primary and Allied Health, Faculty of Medicine Nursing and Health Science, Monash University, Victoria, Australia.
Peter MalliarasSchool of Primary and Allied Health Care, Faculty of Medicine Nursing and Health Science, Monash University, Victoria, Australia.
Monash University · AUQatar University · QASunshine Coast University Hospital · AUUniversity of Essex · GBUniversity of Limerick · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTendinopathy is often a disabling, and persistent musculoskeletal disorder. Psychological factors appear to play a role in the perpetuation of symptoms and influence recovery in musculoskeletal pain. To date, the impact of psychological factors on clinical outcome in tendinopathy remains unclear. Therefore, the purpose of this systematic review was to investigate the strength of association between psychological factors and clinical outcome in tendinopathy.

methodsA systematic review of the literature and qualitative synthesis of published trials was conducted. Electronic searches of ovid MEDLINE, ovid EMBASE, PsychINFO, CINAHL and Cochrane Library was undertaken from their inception to June 2020. Eligibility criteria included RCT's and studies of observational design incorporating measurements of psychological factors and pain, disability and physical functional outcomes in people with tendinopathy. Risk of Bias was assessed by two authors using a modified version of the Newcastle Ottawa Scale. High or low certainty evidence was examined using the GRADE criteria.

resultsTen studies of observational design (6-cross sectional and 4 prospective studies), involving a sample of 719 participants with tendinopathy were included. Risk of bias for the included studies ranged from 12/21 to 21/21. Cross-sectional studies of low to very low level of certainty evidence revealed significant weak to moderate strength of association (r = 0.24 to 0.53) between psychological factors and clinical outcomes. Prospective baseline data of very low certainty evidence showed weak strength of association between psychological factors and clinical outcome. However, prospective studies were inconsistent in showing a predictive relationship between baseline psychological factors on long-term outcome. Cross sectional studies report similar strengths of association between psychological factors and clinical outcomes in tendinopathy to those found in other musculoskeletal conditions.

conclusionThe overall body of the evidence after applying the GRADE criteria was low to very low certainty evidence, due to risk of bias, imprecision and indirectness found across included studies. Future, high quality longitudinal cohort studies are required to investigate the predictive value of baseline psychological factors on long-term clinical outcome.

Indexed as

Adaptation, PsychologicalCross-Sectional StudiesEmotionsHumansPainPain ManagementPrognosisProspective StudiesTendinopathyTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID33253233
PMCPMC7703922
OpenAlexW3106805258

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.