ArticleBMJ open2022
Patients' self-reported medical care for low back pain: a nationwide population-based study.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dynamic Cycle of Low Back Pain: A 17-Year, Population-Based Study Analyzing the National Health Insurance Service Data in South Korea.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Analgesia for non-specific low back pain.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2024Article
- A Stratified Approach for Managing Patients With Low Back Pain in Primary Care (SPLIT Program): A Before-and-After Study.Annals of family 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
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo estimate the prevalence of medical care-seeking among adults with low back pain (LBP) and to characterise and compare use of diagnostic procedures and medical management between primary and secondary care.
designCross-sectional study.
settingData from the EpiReumaPt, a nationwide population-based study conducted in Portugal including a representative sample of non-institutionalised adults (n=10 661) stratified by administrative territorial units was analysed.
participantsIndividuals who self-reported history of LBP within the previous 12 months (n=6434) and sought medical care for this problem in the same period (n=2618). OUTCOME MEASURES: Patients' self-reported diagnostic workup and management procedures performed by medical care for LBP collected through a structured questionnaire. Medical care procedures were stratified by level of care.
resultsThe prevalence of medical care-seeking for LBP was 38.0% (95% CI 35.9% to 40.1%). Primary care in isolation (45.3%) was the most sought level of care. Emergency departments (25.9%) and orthopaedics (19.4%) were the most sought secondary medical specialties. Several pathoanatomical diagnoses were used, supported by laboratory or imaging tests (91.1%). Disc herniation (20.4%) and osteoarthritis (19.7%) were the most frequent diagnoses, and X-ray (63.7%) was the most frequent diagnostic procedure self-reported by individuals. Most (75.1%) reported being treated for LBP: 80.4% with oral medication and 49.9% with injectables. The mean duration of pharmacological treatment was 104.24 (SD, 266.80) days. The use of pathoanatomical diagnoses, laboratory or imaging tests, and pharmacological treatments were generally more frequent for secondary care (p<0.05). Approximately one-quarter of individuals (24.5%) reported seeking care from additional healthcare providers, physiotherapists (66.9%) were the most frequent.
conclusionsMedical care for LBP is frequent and associated with high levels of pathoanatomical diagnoses, imaging and laboratory tests and pharmacological therapy in both primary and secondary care settings. Funding and delivery actions should be prioritised to assure appropriate care for 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.