Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41473972›Full record

ArticleFamily practice2025

"A tool to support, not replace": patient and general practitioner perceptions of digital decision support tools for back pain.

Avi Goodman, Aidan G Cashin, Isha Mishra, Mia Ryan, Jennifer McBride, Steven Marsh, Tianle Xie, Gustavo Batista, Oyungerel Byambasuren, James H McAuley and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Family practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

11 authors.

Avi GoodmanSchool of Health Sciences, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia.
Aidan G CashinSchool of Health Sciences, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia.
Isha MishraSchool of Health Sciences, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia.ORCID 0009-0009-4448-7125
Mia RyanSchool of Health Sciences, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia.
Jennifer McBrideSchool of Health Sciences, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia.
Steven MarshCentre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, NSW 2031, Australia.
Tianle XieCentre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, NSW 2031, Australia.
Gustavo BatistaSchool of Computer Science and Engineering, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia.
Oyungerel ByambasurenInstitute for Evidence-Based Healthcare, Bond University, Robina, QLD 4226, Australia.
James H McAuleySchool of Health Sciences, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia.
Rodrigo R N RizzoSchool of Health Sciences, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9624-6210

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBack pain is the leading musculoskeletal reason for visits in general practice. Time constraints on consultations affect diagnostic decisions and the delivery of evidence-based care. This study explored patient and general practitioner (GP) perspectives on digital tools to support decision-making in back pain management.

methodsWe conducted separate focus groups between June and August 2024 with people experiencing back pain and with registered Australian GPs. We analyzed data using thematic analysis with an inductive approach.

resultsWe interviewed 23 participants: 13 with back pain and 10 GPs. Patients appreciated digital decision-support tools for increasing knowledge and clarifying persistent questions after consultations. GPs, in contrast, emphasized red flag screening, symptom monitoring, and time savings. Shared concerns included information trustworthiness, lack of personalization, and cost, while facilitators included integration into practice management systems and GP endorsement.

conclusionsOur findings highlight opportunities to integrate digital decision-support tools at multiple points in GPs' workflows-before, during, and after consultations-to address the needs of both patients with back pain and GPs. When used before consultations, such tools can help patients prepare by increasing their knowledge, supporting more productive discussions, informing decisions about whether a visit is necessary, and assisting GPs in identifying potential red flags. During consultations, the tools can provide clinicians with updates on current evidence and supply educational resources or prescriptions, particularly for evidence-based lifestyle interventions. After consultations, they can support follow-up by monitoring the patient's condition and addressing any persistent questions that may arise.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelBack PainDecision Support Systems, ClinicalDecision Support TechniquesGeneral PractitionersAdultAustraliaFemaleFocus GroupsGeneral PracticeHumansMaleMiddle AgedQualitative Researchback paindigital healthpain managementprimary health carequalitative research

Identifiers

PMID41473972
PMCPMC12754595

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.