ArticleFrontiers in medicine2024
Exploring the complexity of commonly held attitudes and beliefs of low back pain-a network analysis.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2024. 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.
- People in Brazil hold unhelpful beliefs about low back pain: An online survey using the back pain attitudes questionnaire.Brazilian journal of physical therapy · 2026Article
- Article
- Low back pain prevention behaviors and beliefs among the Polish population in a cross-sectional survey.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The current study used a network analysis approach to explore the complexity of attitudes and beliefs held in people with and without low back pain (LBP). The study aimed to (1) quantify the adjusted associations between individual items of the Back Pain Attitudes Questionnaire (Back-PAQ), and (2) identify the items with the strongest connectivity within the network. Methods: This is a secondary data analysis of a previously published survey using the Back-PAQ ( Results: The two pairwise associations with the greatest magnitude of correlation were between Q30-Q31 [0.54 (95% CI 0.44 to 0.60)] and Q15-Q16 [0.52 (95% CI 0.43 to 0.61)]. These two relationships related to the association between items exploring the influence of attentional focus and expectations (Q30-Q31), and feelings and stress (Q15-Q16). The three items with the greatest average centrality values, were Q22, Q25, and Q10. These items reflect beliefs about damaging the back, exercise, and activity avoidance, respectively. Conclusion: Beliefs about back damage, exercise, and activity avoidance are factors most connected to all other beliefs within the network. These three factors may represent candidate targets that clinicians can focus their counseling efforts on to manage unhelpful attitudes and beliefs in people experiencing 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.