MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Predictors of Back Pain in a General Population Cohort

2003· article· en· W2004095028 on OpenAlex
Jacek A. Kopec, Eric C. Sayre, John M. Esdaile

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueSpine · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaArthritis Research Centre of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBack painPsychosocialPopulationCohortLow back painLogistic regressionDemographyCohort studyPhysical therapyBack injuryIncidence (geometry)Cross-sectional studyPsychiatryInternal medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Brief Study Design. The study used longitudinal data from the first and second cycles (1994–1995 and 1996–1997) of the Canadian National Population Health Survey. Objective. Our objective was to derive prediction models for back pain in the general male and female household populations. Summary of Background Data. Little is known about the predictors of back pain in the general population. Most previous studies focused on specific occupational groups and used a cross-sectional or case-control design. Methods. The study cohort consisted of all respondents aged 18+ years who reported no back problems in the 1994–1995 National Population Health Survey cycle (N = 11,063). Potential predictors of chronic back pain were classified into nine groups and entered into stepwise logistic regression models. Bootstrap methods were used to derive the final models and assess their predictive power. Results. The overall incidence of back pain was 44.7 per 1,000 person-years and was higher in women (47.0 per 1,000 person-years) compared with men (42.2 per 1,000 person-years). In men, significant predictors of back pain were age (peak effect in 45–64 years), height, self-rated health, usual pattern of activity (especially heavy work), yard work or gardening (negative association), and general chronic stress. In women, significant factors were self-reported restrictions in activity, being diagnosed with arthritis, personal stress, and history of psychological trauma in childhood or adolescence. Conclusions. Overall health and psychosocial factors are important predictors of back pain in both men and women. Other risk factors differ between the two sexes. This study used longitudinal data from the Canadian National Population Health Survey. The incidence of chronic back pain in the general household population was 44.7 per 1,000 person-years. Predictors of back pain included age, self-reported health, pattern of activity, height, and psychosocial factors.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.216

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it