Predictors of Low Back Pain Onset in a Prospective British Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study examined predictors of low back pain onset in a British birth cohort. METHODS: Univariate and multivariate analyses focused on individuals who experienced onset of low back pain at 32 to 33 years of age (n= 571) and individuals who were pain free (n = 5210). Participants were members of the 1958 British birth cohort. RESULTS: Incident pain was elevated among those with psychological distress at 23 years of age (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 2.52, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.65, 3.86) and among persistent moderate or heavy smokers (adjusted OR = 1.63, 95% CI = 1.23, 2.17). Significant univariate associations involving other factors (e.g., social class, childhood emotional status, body mass index, job satisfaction) did not persist in multivariate analyses. CONCLUSIONS: This prospectively studied cohort provides evidence that psychological distress more than doubles later risk of low back pain, with smoking having a modest independent effect. Other prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings before implications for low back pain prevention can be assessed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".