MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2066564265 · doi:10.1097/brs.0b013e3181643eb8

Course and Prognostic Factors for Neck Pain in Whiplash-Associated Disorders (WAD)

2008· review· en· W2066564265 on OpenAlexaff
Linda Carroll, Lena W. Holm, Sheilah Hogg‐Johnson, Pierre Côté, J. David Cassidy, Scott Haldeman, Margareta Nordin, Eric L. Hurwitz, Eugene J. Carragee, Gabrielle van der Velde, Paul M. Peloso, Jaime Guzmán

Bibliographic record

VenueSpine · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Work & HealthToronto Western HospitalUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineWhiplashNeck painPhysical therapyEvidence-based medicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPoison controlAlternative medicineEmergency medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Brief Study Design. Best evidence synthesis. Objective. To perform a best evidence synthesis on the course and prognostic factors for neck pain and its associated disorders in Grades I–III whiplash-associated disorders (WAD). Summary of Background Data. Knowledge of the course of recovery of WAD guides expectations for recovery. Identifying prognostic factors assists in planning management and intervention strategies and effective compensation policies to decrease the burden of WAD. Methods. The Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and its Associated Disorders (Neck Pain Task Force) conducted a critical review of the literature published between 1980 and 2006 to assemble the best evidence on neck pain and its associated disorders. Studies meeting criteria for scientific validity were included in a best evidence synthesis. Results. We found 226 articles related to course and prognostic factors in neck pain and its associated disorders. After a critical review, 70 (31%) were accepted on scientific merit; 47 of these studies related to course and prognostic factors in WAD. The evidence suggests that approximately 50% of those with WAD will report neck pain symptoms 1 year after their injuries. Greater initial pain, more symptoms, and greater initial disability predicted slower recovery. Few factors related to the collision itself (for example, direction of the collision, headrest type) were prognostic; however, postinjury psychological factors such as passive coping style, depressed mood, and fear of movement were prognostic for slower or less complete recovery. There is also preliminary evidence that the prevailing compensation system is prognostic for recovery in WAD. Conclusion. The Neck Pain Task Force undertook a best evidence synthesis to establish a baseline of the current best evidence on the course and prognosis for WAD. Recovery of WAD seems to be multifactorial. Our best evidence synthesis on prognosis for recovery in traffic-related whiplash-associated disorders is based on 47 scientifically admissible studies. The evidence indicates that approximately 50% of adults with whiplash-associated disorders reported neck pain symptoms 1 year after injury. Recovery is multifactorial; prognostic factors included initial symptom severity, psychological status, and compensation or legal 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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.081
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.120

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.081
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.011
Bibliometrics0.0100.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0050.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.308 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations646
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpineSame topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationFrench-language works237,207