Early Patterns of Care for Occupational Back Pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Brief Study Design. Cross-sectional analysis. Objectives. To describe the early health care utilization for occupational back pain. To identify factors associated with health care seeking and provider choice among persons with occupational back pain. Summary of Background Data. Back pain is the most prevalent work-related injury, yet little is known about patterns of care for occupational back pain. Materials and Methods. The sample includes 1104 workers with incident episodes of low back pain. Outcomes measures include whether or not workers received care and the types of providers seen. Predictors of outcomes include demographics, injury severity, history of back pain, occupation, and employer. Results. Eight percent of workers did not receive care in the first 4 to 16 weeks after filing a workers’ compensation claim. Injury severity, gender, occupation, and employer were significant predictors of the decision to seek care. Almost 90% of workers who received care were treated by medical physicians, often in combination with physical therapists or chiropractors. Age, occupation, injury severity, and whether the employer or worker chose the initial health care provider were associated with the choice of provider. Employers selected providers for 78% of injured workers who received care. Medical physicians were the providers most often chosen by both employers and workers, but workers were more likely than employers to select chiropractors. Conclusions. A small but significant number of injured workers do not seek care for their back pain. Medical physicians treat all but a small fraction of the workers who receive care. The decision to seek care and the choice of providers is associated with injury severity, occupation, and employer actions. We investigated health care utilization following the onset of occupational back pain. Eight percent of workers do not receive care. Medical physicians, often in combination with physical therapists or chiropractors, treat almost 90% of workers who receive care. Receiving care and the type of care received are associated with demographic characteristics, severity of injury, occupation, and employer.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".