Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37644472›Full record

Trial reportBMC musculoskeletal disorders2023

Comparison of cognitive functional therapy and movement system impairment treatment in chronic low back pain patients: a randomized controlled trial.

Sahar Nazary Soltan Ahmad, Amir Letafatkar, Britton W Brewer, Ali Sharifnezhad

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

NCT07370272 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Lumbopelvic Cognitive Movement Control Training Versus Core Stability Exercises in Treatment of Sacroiliac Joint Pain

TypeinterventionalSponsorCairo UniversityRan2026 to 2026Enrolled36ConditionsSacroiliac Joint PainArmsThe conventional Physiotherpay Program (US & MET), Core Stability Exercises (CSE), Lumbopelvic cognitive movement control training (CMCT)
NCT07659327 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Effects Of Sahrmann's Versus McGill Exercise On Pain, Disability, And Range Of Motion In Patients With Non-Specific Low Back Pain

TypeinterventionalSponsorRiphah International UniversityRan2026 to 2026Enrolled42ConditionsNon-specific Low Back Pain (NSLBP)ArmsSahrmann's Exercises, McGill Exercises
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  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

4 authors.

Sahar Nazary Soltan AhmadFaculty of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, Department of Biomechanics and Sport Injuries, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran.
Amir LetafatkarFaculty of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, Department of Biomechanics and Sport Injuries, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran. letafatkaramir@yahoo.com.
Britton W BrewerDepartment of Psychology, Springfield College, Springfield, USA.
Ali SharifnezhadDepartment of Sport Biomechanics and Technology, Sport Science Research Institute, Tehran, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study aimed to compare the effects of cognitive functional therapy (CFT) and movement system impairment (MSI)-based treatment on pain intensity, disability, Kinesiophobia, and gait kinetics in patients with chronic non-specific low back pain (CNSLBP).

methodsIn a single-blind randomized clinical trial, we randomly assigned 91 patients with CNSLBP into CFT (n = 45) and MSI-based treatment (n = 46) groups. An 8-week training intervention was given to both groups. The researchers measured the primary outcome, which was pain intensity (Numeric rating scale), and the secondary outcomes, including disability (Oswestry disability index), Kinesiophobia (Tampa Kinesiophobia Scale), and vertical ground reaction force (VGRF) parameters at self-selected and faster speed (Force distributor treadmill). We evaluated patients at baseline, at the end of the 8-week intervention (post-treatment), and six months after the first treatment. We used mixed-model ANOVA to evaluate the effects of the interaction between time (baseline vs. post-treatment vs. six-month follow-up) and group (CFT vs. MSI-based treatment) on each measure.

resultsCFT showed superiority over MSI-based treatment in reducing pain intensity (P < 0.001, Effect size (ES) = 2.41), ODI (P < 0.001, ES = 2.15), and Kinesiophobia (P < 0.001, ES = 2.47) at eight weeks. The CFT also produced greater improvement in VGRF parameters, at both self-selected (FPF[P < 0.001, ES = 3], SPF[P < 0.001, ES = 0.5], MSF[P < 0.001, ES = 0.67], WAR[P < 0.001, ES = 1.53], POR[P < 0.001, ES = 0.8]), and faster speed, FPF(P < 0.001, ES = 1.33, MSF(P < 0.001, ES = 0.57), WAR(P < 0.001, ES = 0.67), POR(P < 0.001, ES = 2.91)] than the MSI, except SPF(P < 0.001, ES = 0.0) at eight weeks.

conclusionThis study suggests that the CFT is associated with better results in clinical and cognitive characteristics than the MSI-based treatment for CNSLBP, and the researchers maintained the treatment effects at six-month follow-up. Also, This study achieved better improvements in gait kinetics in CFT. CTF seems to be an appropriate and applicable treatment in clinical setting.

trial registrationThe researchers retrospectively registered the trial 10/11/2022, at https://www.umin.ac.jp/ with identifier number (UMIN000047455).

Indexed as

Cognitive Behavioral TherapyLow Back PainCognitionGaitHumansSingle-Blind MethodChronic low back painCognitionExercise therapyGait kineticsKinesiophobia

Identifiers

PMID37644472
PMCPMC10463585

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.