Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33974661›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Methodological considerations in the assessment of direct and indirect costs of back pain: A systematic scoping review.

Dawit T Zemedikun, Jesse Kigozi, Gwenllian Wynne-Jones, Alessandra Guariglia, Tracy Roberts

Registry-linked trialAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07399145 (Comparison of the Effects of Prolotherapy and Rehabilitation Treatments in Low Back Pain), which is not on this map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

NCT07399145 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Comparison of the Effects of Prolotherapy and Rehabilitation Treatments in Low Back Pain

TypeinterventionalSponsorBalnear and Rehabilitation Sanatorium TechirghiolRan2025 to 2025Enrolled84ConditionsLow Back PainArmsProlotherapy, Balneotherapy plus Physiotherapy, Physiotherapy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Real-world two-year durability of restorative neurostimulation for treatment of multifidus dysfunction in patients with chronic low back pain: an observational German cohort study.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 · 2026
    Observational
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

5 authors.

Dawit T ZemedikunHealth Economics Unit, Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, England, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-3642-0456
Jesse KigoziHealth Economics Unit, Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, England, United Kingdom.
Gwenllian Wynne-JonesPrimary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Staffordshire, Keele, England, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-0283-6632
Alessandra GuarigliaDepartment of Economics, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, England, United Kingdom.
Tracy RobertsHealth Economics Unit, Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, England, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBack pain is a common and costly health problem worldwide. There is yet a lack of consistent methodologies to estimate the economic burden of back pain to society.

objectiveTo systematically evaluate the methodologies used in the published cost of illness (COI) literature for estimating the direct and indirect costs attributed to back pain, and to present a summary of the estimated cost burden.

methodsSix electronic databases were searched to identify COI studies of back pain published in English up to February 2021. A total of 1,588 abstracts were screened, and 55 full-text studies were subsequently reviewed. After applying the inclusion criteria, 45 studies pertaining to the direct and indirect costs of back pain were analysed.

resultsThe studies reported data on 15 industrialised countries. The national cost estimates of back pain in 2015 USD ranged from $259 million ($29.1 per capita) in Sweden to $71.6 billion ($868.4 per capita) in Germany. There was high heterogeneity among the studies in terms of the methodologies used for analysis and the resulting costs reported. Most of the studies assessed costs from a societal perspective (n = 29). The magnitude and accuracy of the reported costs were influenced by the case definition of back pain, the source of data used, the cost components included and the analysis method. Among the studies that provided both direct and indirect cost estimates (n = 15), indirect costs resulting from lost or reduced work productivity far outweighed the direct costs.

conclusionBack pain imposes substantial economic burden on society. This review demonstrated that existing published COI studies of back pain used heterogeneous approaches reflecting a lack of consensus on methodology. A standardised methodological approach is required to increase credibility of the findings of COI studies and improve comparison of estimates across studies.

Indexed as

Cost of IllnessBack PainCosts and Cost AnalysisEuropeHealth Care CostsHumansJapanNorth America

Identifiers

PMID33974661
PMCPMC8112645

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.