SynthesisPloS one2020
Comparing the effectiveness of group-based exercise to other non-pharmacological interventions for chronic low back pain: A systematic review.
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 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of the association of continuous shortwave diathermy and Pilates-based exercises on pain, depression, and anxiety in chronic non-specific low back pain: a randomized clinical trial.Brazilian journal of medical and biological research = Revista brasileira de pesquisas medicas e biologica · 2023Trial
- Exploring pain conceptualization in relation to outcomes in patients with chronic low back pain: a prospective observational study.Croatian medical journal · 2026Observational
- Motivation and behavioral mechanisms of physical activity in community-dwelling elderly populations.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Patients and physiotherapy professionals' perspectives on group-based treatments: a systematic review protocol.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Dealing with Chronic Pain: Tips to Teach Undergraduate Health Sciences Students.Journal of pain research · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLow back pain (LBP) is the leading cause of disability worldwide with a substantial financial burden on individuals and health care systems. To address this, clinical practice guidelines often recommend non-pharmacological, non-invasive management approaches. One management approach that has been recommended and widely implemented for chronic LBP is group-based exercise programs, however, their clinical value compared with other non-pharmacological interventions has not been investigated systematically.
objectiveTo compare the effectiveness of group-based exercise with other non-pharmacological interventions in people with chronic LBP.
methodsFour electronic databases were searched by two independent reviewers. Only randomized controlled trials that compared group-based exercise with other non-pharmacological interventions for chronic LBP were eligible. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Handbook for systematic reviews of Interventions by two independent reviewers.
resultsEleven studies were eligible. We identified strong evidence of no difference between group exercise and other non-pharmacologic interventions for disability level and pain scores 3-month post-intervention in people with chronic LBP. We could not find any strong or moderate evidence for or against the use of group-based exercise in the rehabilitation of people with chronic LBP for other time-points and health measurement outcomes. We found no statistically significant differences in disability and quality of life and pain between the group and individual non-pharmacological interventions that included exercise.
conclusionWith this equivocal finding, group-based exercise may be a preferred choice given potential advantages in other domains not reviewed here such as motivation and cost. Further research in this area is needed to evaluate this possibility.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.