Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34845083›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2021

Network meta-analysis for comparative effectiveness of treatments for chronic low back pain disorders: systematic review protocol.

Daniel L Belavy, Ashish D Diwan, Jon Ford, Clint T Miller, Andrew J Hahne, Niamh Mundell, Scott Tagliaferri, Steven Bowe, Hugo Pedder, Tobias Saueressig and 5 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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.

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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

15 authors.

Daniel L BelavyPhysiotherapy, Hochschule fur Gesundheit, Bochum, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany belavy@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-9307-832X
Ashish D DiwanDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Spine Service, St. George Hospital, Kogarah, New South Wales, Australia.
Jon FordAdvance Healthcare, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Clint T MillerInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.
Andrew J HahneLow Back Research Team, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia.
Niamh MundellDeakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5406-3216
Scott TagliaferriDeakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-3669-4131
Steven BoweBiostatistics Unit, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.
Hugo PedderBristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Tobias SaueressigPhysio Meets Science GmbH, Leimen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-3332-3856
Xiaohui ZhaoXi'an University of Architecture and Technology, Xi'an, China.
Xiaolong ChenDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Spine Service, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Arun Prasad BalasundaramLow Back Research Team, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia.
Nitin Kumar AroraPhysiotherapy, Hochschule fur Gesundheit, Bochum, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany.
Patrick J OwenInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-3924-9375

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/M005615/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionChronic low back pain disorders (CLBDs) present a substantial societal burden; however, optimal treatment remains debated. To date, pairwise and network meta-analyses have evaluated individual treatment modes, yet a comparison of a wide range of common treatments is required to evaluate their relative effectiveness. Using network meta-analysis, we aim to evaluate the effectiveness of treatments (acupuncture, education or advice, electrophysical agents, exercise, manual therapies/manipulation, massage, the McKenzie method, pharmacotherapy, psychological therapies, surgery, epidural injections, percutaneous treatments, traction, physical therapy, multidisciplinary pain management, placebo, 'usual care' and/or no treatment) on pain intensity, disability and/or mental health in patients with CLBDs. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Six electronic databases and reference lists of 285 prior systematic reviews were searched. Eligible studies will be randomised controlled/clinical trials (including cross-over and cluster designs) that examine individual treatments or treatment combinations in adult patients with CLBDs. Studies must be published in English, German or Chinese as a full-journal publication in a peer-reviewed journal. A narrative approach will be used to synthesise and report qualitative and quantitative data, and, where feasible, network meta-analyses will be performed. Reporting of the review will be informed by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidance, including the network meta-analysis extension (PRISMA-NMA). The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach for network meta-analysis will be implemented for assessing the quality of the findings. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for this systematic review of the published data. Findings will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publication. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO registration number CRD42020182039.

Indexed as

Low Back PainAdultExerciseHumansNetwork Meta-Analysis as TopicPain ManagementPhysical Therapy ModalitiesSystematic Reviews as Topicback painpain managementrehabilitation medicinespine

Identifiers

PMID34845083
PMCPMC8634013

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.