ArticleIndian journal of occupational and environmental medicine
A Diagnostic Assistant Tool for Work-Related Low Back Pain in Hospital Workers.
Article in Indian journal of occupational and environmental medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Factor Analysis of Low Back Pain among Women in Sea Food Processing.Indian journal of occupational and environmental medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsThe study objective was to develop a clinical risk score to assist occupational medicine physicians in diagnosing hospital workers' occupational lower back pain (LBP). SETTINGS AND
designA cross-sectional data collection design was conducted at Saraburi Hospital, Thailand. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The sample consisted of 220 hospital workers who cared for patients and had LBP. They were assessed for the frequency of targeted activities (CPR, lifting, transferring patients) and other activities from work as well as ergonomic assessments, and diagnosed with LBP by three occupational medicine physicians. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Predicted factors of multivariable logistic regression were analysed to find clinical risk scores to help the diagnosis.
resultsThe physicians agreed on the diagnosis, based on ergonomic risk factors and their experiences that 86 persons have occupational LBP. A diagnostic assistant tool consists of six predictors: the duration of LBP, having LBP within the last 7 days, bending, twisting, lateral bending, and reaching. The scores predicted occupational LBP correctly with an AuROC of 90.0% (95% CI; 84.8-93.5%). The positive likelihood ratio for occupational LBP was 0 in the low risk category (<6 points) and 16.8 (95% CI; 8.0-35.6) in the high risk (>8 points).
conclusionsA diagnostic assistant tool is used to assist occupational medicine physicians in diagnosing hospital workers' occupational LBP.
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.