ArticlePloS one2024
Patients' experiences with musculoskeletal spinal pain: A qualitative systematic review protocol.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Patients' experiences with musculoskeletal spinal pain: a qualitative systematic review.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 · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMusculoskeletal (MSK) spinal pain encapsulates various conditions including lumbar (low back), cervical (neck), and thoracic pain that significantly impact individual and global health. While clinical aspects of spinal pain have been well-studied, understanding patients' personal narratives and lived experiences remains essential for enhancing patient-centered care, improving treatment adherence, and informing healthcare policies. It provides deep insights into the impacts of spinal pain, guiding more effective and empathetic treatment approaches. This systematic review aims to synthesize qualitative evidence on patients' experiences with MSK spinal pain, providing insight into the challenges faced, coping strategies, daily life impacts, and healthcare interactions. The objective of this review is to synthesize the qualitative evidence regarding the lived experiences of patients with MSK spinal pain.
methodsThis systematic review will use a meta-aggregation approach to synthesize data from qualitative studies, that will be identified through a comprehensive search of electronic databases and supplemented by grey literature searches. Two independent reviewers will screen, identify, and extract data from eligible studies. In cases of disagreement, conflicts will be resolved by consulting a third reviewer. These same reviewers will then use the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) qualitative quality assessment tool to evaluate the methodological quality of the identified studies, with the derived scores informing the synthesis process, that will involve extracting each study's findings along with their supporting illustrations, then grouped into categories based on similarity in meaning. These categories will then be aggregated to form synthesized findings. IMPLICATIONS: Synthesized findings on patients' lived experiences with MSK spinal pain including key themes, patterns, and insights will be presented. By emphasizing patient narratives, the results of the review can contribute to the optimization of outcomes, and to enhance patient-provider relations and improve quality of care in MSK spinal health.
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.