The Prognostic Value of Functional Capacity Evaluation in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain: Part 1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Brief Study Design. Historical cohort study. Objectives. We examined the validity of the Isernhagen Work Systems’ Evaluation in predicting timely return to work. Summary of Background Data. Functional Capacity Evaluations are used commonly to determine readiness for return to work, yet little is known of their validity. Methods. Workers’ compensation claimants undergoing Functional Capacity Evaluations following work-related low back injury were studied. Two cohorts were formed, one on which exploratory analyses were conducted and a second for confirmation. Evaluation indicators were the number of tasks in the protocol rated as failed and performance during the floor-to-waist lift task. The primary outcome investigated was time receiving total temporary disability benefits (as a surrogate of return to work) and a secondary outcome was time until claim closure in the year following Evaluation. Cox proportional-hazards regression was used to determine the prognostic effect of Evaluation crudely and after controlling for potential confounders. Results. Few patients (4%) were found to pass all Evaluation tasks, yet most experienced total temporary disability suspension and claim closure within 1 year following Functional Capacity Evaluations. Better Evaluation performance was related to faster time to suspension of total temporary disability benefits and claim closure after controlling confounding factors, but explained little of the variation in these outcomes (~10%). Performance on the floor-to-waist lift was as predictive as the number of failed tasks in the entire Functional Capacity Evaluations protocol. Conclusions. Better performance on Evaluation was weakly associated with faster recovery; however, the amount of variation explained was small. One task in the Evaluation was as predictive as the entire protocol. An historical cohort study was conducted of workers' compensation claimants undergoing Functional Capacity Evaluation following work-related low back injury. Better performance on Functional Capacity Evaluations was weakly associated with faster recovery. However, the amount of variation explained was small. One task in the Functional Capacity Evaluations predicted as well as the entire protocol.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".