Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36057717›Full record

ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2022

Development and internal validation of a machine learning prediction model for low back pain non-recovery in patients with an acute episode consulting a physiotherapist in primary care.

J Knoop, W van Lankveld, L Beijer, F J B Geerdink, M W Heymans, T J Hoogeboom, S Hoppenbrouwers, E van Overmeeren, R Soer, C Veenhof and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 2 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.

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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Moving towards the use of artificial intelligence in pain management.European journal of pain (London, England) · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. The clinical course of acute, subacute and persistent low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2024
    Pooled it
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. 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

14 authors.

J KnoopMusculoskeletal Rehabilitation Research Group, HAN University of Applied Sciences, PO Box 6960, 6503 GL, Nijmegen, Netherlands. jesper.knoop@han.nl.
W van LankveldMusculoskeletal Rehabilitation Research Group, HAN University of Applied Sciences, PO Box 6960, 6503 GL, Nijmegen, Netherlands.
L BeijerMusculoskeletal Rehabilitation Research Group, HAN University of Applied Sciences, PO Box 6960, 6503 GL, Nijmegen, Netherlands.
F J B GeerdinkResearch Group Smart Health, Saxion University of Applied Sciences, Enschede, Netherlands.
M W HeymansDepartment of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
T J HoogeboomRadboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Centre, IQ Healthcare, Nijmegen, Netherlands.
S HoppenbrouwersAcademy of IT and Mediadesign, Data and Knowledge Engineering Research Group, HAN University of Applied Sciences, Nijmegen, Netherlands.
E van OvermeerenRoyal Dutch Society for Physical Therapy, Amersfoort, Netherlands.
R SoerResearch Group Smart Health, Saxion University of Applied Sciences, Enschede, Netherlands.
C VeenhofDepartment of Rehabilitation, Physiotherapy Science and Sport, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands.
K C P VissersDepartment of Anesthesiology, Pain and Palliative Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, Netherlands.
P J van der WeesRadboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Centre, IQ Healthcare, Nijmegen, Netherlands.
M SappelliAcademy of IT and Mediadesign, Data and Knowledge Engineering Research Group, HAN University of Applied Sciences, Nijmegen, Netherlands.
J B StaalMusculoskeletal Rehabilitation Research Group, HAN University of Applied Sciences, PO Box 6960, 6503 GL, Nijmegen, Netherlands.

Funding

Nationaal Regieorgaan Praktijkgericht Onderzoek SIA PRJ006137
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhile low back pain occurs in nearly everybody and is the leading cause of disability worldwide, we lack instruments to accurately predict persistence of acute low back pain. We aimed to develop and internally validate a machine learning model predicting non-recovery in acute low back pain and to compare this with current practice and 'traditional' prediction modeling.

methodsPrognostic cohort-study in primary care physiotherapy. Patients (n = 247) with acute low back pain (≤ one month) consulting physiotherapists were included. Candidate predictors were assessed by questionnaire at baseline and (to capture early recovery) after one and two weeks. Primary outcome was non-recovery after three months, defined as at least mild pain (Numeric Rating Scale > 2/10). Machine learning models to predict non-recovery were developed and internally validated, and compared with two current practices in physiotherapy (STarT Back tool and physiotherapists' expectation) and 'traditional' logistic regression analysis.

resultsForty-seven percent of the participants did not recover at three months. The best performing machine learning model showed acceptable predictive performance (area under the curve: 0.66). Although this was no better than a'traditional' logistic regression model, it outperformed current practice.

conclusionsWe developed two prognostic models containing partially different predictors, with acceptable performance for predicting (non-)recovery in patients with acute LBP, which was better than current practice. Our prognostic models have the potential of integration in a clinical decision support system to facilitate data-driven, personalized treatment of acute low back pain, but needs external validation first.

Indexed as

Acute PainLow Back PainPhysical TherapistsHumansMachine LearningPrimary Health CareReferral and ConsultationAcuteLow back painMachine learningPrognosticRecovery

Identifiers

PMID36057717
PMCPMC9440317

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.