ArticleScientific reports2026
Machine learning models for predicting treatment outcomes in chronic non-specific back pain patients undergoing lumbar extension traction.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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.
- Pelvic morphology decoupling from lumbar lordosis in chronic low back pain.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 · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence-Based Physical Therapy Interventions for Non-Specific Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Improved Chronic Low Back Pain, Radiographic Alignment, and Patient Reported Outcomes Following Postural Rehabilitation Protocols: A Case Series of Two Patients with 18- and 26-Months Follow-Up.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Conservative treatment for chronic non-specific low back pain (CLBP) includes lumbar extension traction (LET) to re-align lumbar lordosis (LL). This study explores the use of machine learning (ML) models to predict post-treatment outcomes in patients with CLBP undergoing LET and how these predictions can support clinical decision-making. We utilized a retrospective database of 431 consecutive patients with uncomplicated CLBP. Post-treatment variables predicted included LL, NRS pain score, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Input model variables included pre-treatment LL, sacral base angle (SBA), ratio of LL/SBA fit type, NRS, ODI, frequency, duration, LET compliance, and demographic variables of age and BMI. Initial variables were analyzed to predict post-treatment outcomes. Three ML models—Random Forest (RF), XGBoost, and Multilayer Perceptron (MLP)—were employed to handle both continuous and categorical variables, and performance was evaluated for predictive accuracy. Factors affecting outcomes were identified using Shapley Additive Explanations. Treatment was a multimodal spine rehabilitation program featuring LET applied 3–6 times per week, varied between 4 and 10 weeks, and follow-up was performed at the end of care. Improvements in LL, NRS, and ODI were − 11.5° to − 23.6°, 7.3/10 to 3.3/10, and 33.2% to 10.4%, respectively. Among the ML models, XGBoost demonstrated the highest predictive accuracy for lumbar lordotic angle (R2 = 0.728) and pain score (R2 = 0.648), while Random Forest slightly outperformed XGBoost for ODI (0.631 vs. 0.616). MLP performed poorly for ODI predictions (R2 = 0.201), indicating difficulty in capturing functional disability patterns. SHAP analysis identified fit type, compliance, traction frequency, pre-treatment lumbar curve, and BMI as the most influential predictors. These predictors offer actionable insight for clinical decision-making by allowing clinicians to stratify patients based on predicted responsiveness, tailor LET frequency and duration, and educate patients on the importance of compliance. This study demonstrates that ML models, particularly XGBoost and Random Forest, can effectively predict LET outcomes, supporting personalized treatment strategies for CLBP patients.
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.