SynthesisBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2022
Psychological interventions for chronic, non-specific low back pain: systematic review with network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 99 papers, 17 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
99 citing papers in PubMed, 17 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 203 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- The effectiveness of psychological interventions on pain, disability, and psychological symptoms in whiplash-associated disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC psychology · 2026Pooled it
- Effects of psychological intervention on outcomes of critically ill patients and their families: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Consensus practice guidelines on sacroiliac joint complex pain from a multispecialty, international working group.Pain medicine (Malden, Mass.) · 2025Guideline
- Comparing the Effects of Dairy and Soybean on Bone Health in Women: A Food- and Component-Level Network Meta-Analysis.Nutrients · 2025Pooled it
- Efficacy of psychological interventions on sleep in children and adolescents with chronic pain: a systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Psychological Interventions Added to Standard Care Improve Pain and Function Outcomes in Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Musculoskeletal care · 2025Pooled it
- The McKenzie Method delivered by credentialed therapists for chronic low back pain with directional preference: systematic review with meta-analysis.The Journal of manual & manipulative therapy · 2025Pooled it
- Non-pharmacological and non-surgical treatments for low back pain in adults: an overview of Cochrane reviews.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Effect of Motivational Interviewing and Exercise on Chronic Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Musculoskeletal care · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Surgical interventions for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review with network meta-analysis.BMC medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Therapist-guided remote versus in-person cognitive behavioural therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2024Pooled it
- Effects of interventions on smoking cessation: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.Addiction biology · 2024Pooled it
- The role of psychosocial factors in the interprofessional management of women with chronic pelvic pain: A systematic review.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2024Pooled it
- Exercise interventions for nonspecific low back pain: a bibliometric analysis of global research from 2018 to 2023.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Comparative effectiveness of exercise, antidepressants and their combination in treating non-severe depression: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.British journal of sports medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Psychosocial Intervention and Rehabilitation Utilization Together Improve Pain and Function After Traumatic Orthopaedic Injuries: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial.Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2025Trial
- Trial
- Durable chronic low back pain reductions up to 24 months after treatment for an accessible, 8-week, in-home behavioral skills-based virtual reality program: a randomized controlled trial.Pain medicine (Malden, Mass.) · 2023Trial
39 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine the comparative effectiveness and safety of psychological interventions for chronic low back pain.
designSystematic review with network meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, SCOPUS, and CINAHL from database inception to 31 January 2021. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR STUDY SELECTION: Randomised controlled trials comparing psychological interventions with any comparison intervention in adults with chronic, non-specific low back pain. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and confidence in the evidence. Primary outcomes were physical function and pain intensity. A random effects network meta-analysis using a frequentist approach was performed at post-intervention (from the end of treatment to <2 months post-intervention); and at short term (≥2 to <6 months post-intervention), mid-term (≥6 to <12 months post-intervention), and long term follow-up (≥12 months post-intervention). Physiotherapy care was the reference comparison intervention. The design-by-treatment interaction model was used to assess global inconsistency and the Bucher method was used to assess local inconsistency.
results97 randomised controlled trials involving 13 136 participants and 17 treatment nodes were included. Inconsistency was detected at short term and mid-term follow-up for physical function, and short term follow-up for pain intensity, and were resolved through sensitivity analyses. For physical function, cognitive behavioural therapy (standardised mean difference 1.01, 95% confidence interval 0.58 to 1.44), and pain education (0.62, 0.08 to 1.17), delivered with physiotherapy care, resulted in clinically important improvements at post-intervention (moderate quality evidence). The most sustainable effects of treatment for improving physical function were reported with pain education delivered with physiotherapy care, at least until mid-term follow-up (0.63, 0.25 to 1.00; low quality evidence). No studies investigated the long term effectiveness of pain education delivered with physiotherapy care. For pain intensity, behavioural therapy (1.08, 0.22 to 1.94), cognitive behavioural therapy (0.92, 0.43 to 1.42), and pain education (0.91, 0.37 to 1.45), delivered with physiotherapy care, resulted in clinically important effects at post-intervention (low to moderate quality evidence). Only behavioural therapy delivered with physiotherapy care maintained clinically important effects on reducing pain intensity until mid-term follow-up (1.01, 0.41 to 1.60; high quality evidence).
conclusionsFor people with chronic, non-specific low back pain, psychological interventions are most effective when delivered in conjunction with physiotherapy care (mainly structured exercise). Pain education programmes (low to moderate quality evidence) and behavioural therapy (low to high quality evidence) result in the most sustainable effects of treatment; however, uncertainty remains as to their long term effectiveness. Although inconsistency was detected, potential sources were identified and resolved. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42019138074.
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.