Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38347486›Full record

ReviewBMC medical education2024

Development of low back pain curriculum content standards for entry-level clinical training.

Hazel J Jenkins, Benjamin T Brown, Mary O'Keeffe, Niamh Moloney, Chris G Maher, Mark Hancock

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC medical education, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. 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

6 authors.

Hazel J JenkinsFaculty of Medicine, Health and Human Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia. hazel.jenkins@mq.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0535-687X
Benjamin T BrownFaculty of Medicine, Health and Human Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3064-8815
Mary O'KeeffeInstitute for Musculoskeletal Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney Musculoskeletal Health, Sydney, Australia.
Niamh MoloneyFaculty of Health Sciences, Curtin University, Perth, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5957-7224
Chris G MaherSydney Musculoskeletal Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1628-7857
Mark HancockFaculty of Medicine, Health and Human Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9277-5377

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe management of low back pain (LBP) is highly variable and patients often receive management that is not recommended and/or miss out on recommended care. Clinician knowledge and behaviours are strongly influenced by entry-level clinical training and are commonly cited as barriers to implementing evidence-based management. Currently there are no internationally recognised curriculum standards for the teaching of LBP content to ensure graduating clinicians have the appropriate knowledge and competencies to assess and manage LBP. We formed an international interdisciplinary working group to develop curriculum content standards for the teaching of LBP in entry-level clinical training programs.

methodsThe working group included representatives from 11 countries: 18 academics and clinicians from healthcare professions who deal with the management of LBP (medicine, physiotherapy, chiropractic, osteopathy, pharmacology, and psychology), seven professional organisation representatives (medicine, physiotherapy, chiropractic, spine societies), and one healthcare consumer. A literature review was performed, including database and hand searches of guidelines and accreditation, curricula, and other policy documents, to identify gaps in current LBP teaching and recommended entry-level knowledge and competencies. The steering group (authors) drafted the initial LBP Curriculum Content Standards (LBP-CCS), which were discussed and modified through two review rounds with the working group.

resultsSixty-two documents informed the draft standards. The final LBP-CCS consisted of four broad topics covering the epidemiology, biopsychosocial contributors, assessment, and management of LBP. For each topic, key knowledge and competencies to be achieved by the end of entry-level clinical training were described.

conclusionWe have developed the LBP-CCS in consultation with an interdisciplinary, international working group. These standards can be used to inform or benchmark the content of curricula related to LBP in new or existing entry-level clinical training programs.

Indexed as

Low Back PainCurriculumDelivery of Health CareHealth PersonnelHumansCurriculum content standardsEntry-level clinical trainingHealthcare educationLow back painMedical education

Identifiers

PMID38347486
PMCPMC10863179

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.