Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40238054›Full record

SynthesisJournal of occupational rehabilitation2026

Predicting Work Disability Related to Spinal Pain: A Systematic Review of the Most Clinically Relevant Tools.

Thomas Gerard, Pierre-Luc Lachance, Martin Rabey, Yannick Tousignant-Laflamme

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of occupational rehabilitation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Thomas GerardSchool of Rehabilitation, Université de Sherbrooke, 3001 12e avenue Nord, Sherbrooke, QC, J1H 5 N4, Canada.
Pierre-Luc LachanceSchool of Rehabilitation, Université de Sherbrooke, 3001 12e avenue Nord, Sherbrooke, QC, J1H 5 N4, Canada.
Martin RabeySchool of Allied Health, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia.
Yannick Tousignant-LaflammeSchool of Rehabilitation, Université de Sherbrooke, 3001 12e avenue Nord, Sherbrooke, QC, J1H 5 N4, Canada. yannick.tousignant-laflamme@usherbrooke.ca.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeMusculoskeletal disorders, especially spinal conditions, are leading causes of disability, contributing significantly to work absenteeism and socio-economic burden. Rehabilitation is essential for promoting sustainable return to work (RTW). However, clinicians need reliable tools with appropriate psychometric properties to determine patients' risk of persistent work disability and tailor interventions. This systematic review objectives were to (1) identify clinically useful questionnaires that enable clinicians to identify individuals with spinal pain (back or neck pain) at risk of work disability, and (2) document the psychometric properties of the identified questionnaires.

methodsA systematic search was conducted in three databases from inception to 01/10/2025, to retrieve relevant studies. Studies were included if they reported self-administered questionnaires with ≤ 15 items predicting RTW outcomes in spinal disorders. Tools were evaluated based on psychometric properties (calibration, discrimination), and pragmatic characteristics (number of items, readability).

resultsSeventeen studies were retrieved including 16 unique questionnaires of which four demonstrated sufficient discrimination capability. From these, the Örebro musculoskeletal pain questionnaire 10-items (ÖMPQ- 10), STarT Back screening tool (SBST), and a single item from the ÖMPQ- 25 demonstrated acceptable to excellent discrimination for low back pain populations, but showed lower discrimination for mixed or neck pain populations.

conclusionThe SBST, ÖMPQ- 10, and single items from the ÖMPQ- 25 performed best in predicting RTW outcomes for low back pain. No questionnaire had sufficient discriminatory capability for neck pain. These results should be interpreted with caution, as the overall risk of bias assessment remains unclear for the OMPQ- 10 and high for the SBST. Further research is necessary to develop or validate tools specific to neck pain and mixed populations.

Indexed as

Back PainDisability EvaluationNeck PainReturn to WorkHumansPsychometricsSurveys and QuestionnairesLow back painNeck PainRehabilitationReturn-to-workSpinal pain

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.