ArticleEuropean journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine2025
Prevalence and risk factors of neck pain among middle-aged and older adults in China: a cross-sectional study from the CHARLS cohort.
Article in European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Posture management for neck pain: identification and quantification of associated factors based on a multicentre cross-sectional study in China.Journal of global health · 2026Observational
- Latent pain class identification, longitudinal transitions, and machine learning prediction of incident low back pain in middle-aged and older Chinese adults.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- Burden and Risk Factors of Neck Pain in China: A Dual-Database Study of GBD 2021 Population-Level Macro-Trends and CHARLS Individual-Level Prospective Cohort Analyses.Journal of pain research · 2026Article
- Association Between Chronic Neck Pain and Increased Risk of Chronic Respiratory Diseases in Middle-Aged and Elderly Chinese Adults: A Cohort Study Based on CHARLS.Journal of pain research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo investigate neck pain prevalence and risk factors pain in China.
designCross-sectional analysis using data from the China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study.
settingNationwide study conducted in China. POPULATION: Adults aged 45 years or older.
methodsThe data for the study were from the China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study. A total of 19816 representative subjects were selected by multi-stage stratified sampling method. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were conducted to identify potential risk factors for neck pain.
resultsThe estimated prevalence of neck pain among Chinese people over 45 was 18.93% (95% CI 18.32-19.55). Neck pain prevalence significantly differed according to sex, with an overall rate of 12.26% in men and 25.04% in women (P<0.001 for sex difference). Risk factors for neck pain included female (odds ratio [OR] 1.83, 95% CI 1.61-2.08), depression (1.23, 1.06-1.42), short sleep time (1.48,1.31-1.68), more than one chronic condition (1.18, 1.04-1.35), headache (4.83, 4.28-5.47), poor health status (2.93, 2.18-3.92), limitation of physical activity (1.37,1.21-1.57) and activity of daily living (1.48, 1.31-1.68). A lower risk of neck pain was associated with age over 75 and illiterate.
conclusionsThe Prevalence of neck pain in China is relatively high. These results may help to develop proper prevention and treatment measures for patients with neck pain. CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT: Our study provides insights for rehabilitating neck pain in adults aged 45 or older, aiding targeted interventions and preventive measures.
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.