ReviewJournal of personalized medicine2022
App-Based Rehabilitation in Back Pain, a Systematic Review.
Review in Journal of personalized medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Low back pain self-management mobile applications: a systematic review on digital platforms.Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da U S P · 2024Pooled it
- Digital self-care in the management of spine musculoskeletal disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Revista latino-americana de enfermagem · 2023Pooled it
- The Physical and Psychological Effects of Telerehabilitation-Based Exercise for Patients With Nonspecific Low Back Pain: Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2024Trial
- Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of a Stratified Blended Physiotherapy Intervention Compared With Face-to-Face Physiotherapy in Patients With Nonspecific Low Back Pain: Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Trial
- Exploring the role of treatment adherence in spine rehabilitation outcomes: a multicenter analysis of 21,362 patients in India.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 · 2026Article
- [Implementation and benefits of healthcare apps in surgical disciplines-A Delphi expert consensus].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- Self-Efficacy, Self-Management and Use of Smartphone Apps for Low-Back Pain.Pain research & management · 2025Article
- The Efficacy of the Smartphone App for the Self-Management of Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Assessment of Their Quality through the Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS) in Italy.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Smartphones and their associated applications are used frequently by patients and clinicians alike. Despite the technology being widely accessible, their use to aid in rehabilitation is yet to be adopted. The SARS CoV-2 pandemic has presented an opportunity to expedite their integration given the difficulty patients currently have in accessing healthcare. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic literature review on the use of smartphone rehabilitation applications compared to standard physiotherapy for back pain. We conducted a search of Medline/Pubmed and google databases using the search terms [APP] AND [[Orthopaedic] OR [Neurosurgery]], following the PRISMA guidelines. All prospective studies investigating rehabilitation applications for back pain or following spine surgery were included. A total of nine studies met the inclusion criteria which investigated 7636 patients, of which 92.4% were allocated to the interventional group (
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.