Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41730579›Full record

ArticleAnnals of rehabilitation medicine2026

Psychometric Validation of the LBP-BSTv2 for Assessing Maladaptive Beliefs in Patients With Non-Specific Low Back Pain.

Christophe Demoulin, Thibault Desjardins, Irène Salamun, Michael Norberg, Violaine Foltz, Florian Bailly, Laurent Pitance, Jean-François Kaux, Romain Artico

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of rehabilitation medicine, 2026. 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

9 authors.

Christophe DemoulinDepartment of Physical Activity and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium.
Thibault DesjardinsScientific Committee, OMT France (French Orthopaedic Manual Therapy Organization), Paris, France.
Irène SalamunInterdisciplinary Algology Center, University Hospital Centre of Liège, Liège, Belgium.
Michael NorbergPhysical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University hospital of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Violaine FoltzRheumatology Department, Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Paris, France.
Florian BaillyRheumatology Department, Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Paris, France.
Laurent PitanceFaculty of Motor Sciences, Université Catholique de Louvain-La-Neuve, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium.
Jean-François KauxDepartment of Physical Activity and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium.
Romain ArticoScientific Committee, OMT France (French Orthopaedic Manual Therapy Organization), Paris, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To assess maladaptive beliefs about low back pain (LBP), valid and reliable measurement tools are required. Although some tools exist to assess them, the Low Back Pain-related Beliefs Screening Tool (LBP-BST) was developed in order to explore all different categories of misbeliefs in individuals chronic low back pain (CLBP). This study aimed to evaluate the main psychometric properties of both the short and long versions of the revised LBPBSTv2.

methodsA total of 108 patients with CLBP completed the LBP-BSTv2 to assess its potential floor/ceiling effects, internal consistency, and construct validity. The latter was evaluated by comparing scores with the Back Beliefs Questionnaire (BBQ). Test-retest reliability was assessed in 47 of the participants one week later.

resultsNo floor or ceiling effects were observed. The short and long versions of the LBPBSTv2 showed strong construct validity, with significant correlations with BBQ scores. Internal consistency was acceptable to good (Cronbach's alpha: 0.77-0.84), and test-retest reliability was high (intraclass correlation coefficient: 0.76-0.81). Conclusion: The LBP-BSTv2 is a valid and reliable tool for assessing maladaptive beliefs in patients with CLBP. Its integration into clinical practice could help healthcare professionals identify and address unhelpful beliefs that may hinder rehabilitation. Further research is needed to confirm its usefulness in tracking changes over time and guiding individualized interventions and to study other psychometric properties such as responsiveness.

Indexed as

Health knowledgeLow back painPsychometricsRehabilitationSurveys and questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID41730579
PMCPMC12961345

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.