Outcomes of an interdisciplinary rehabilitation programme for the management of chronic low back pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT: The health and economic costs associated with chronic low back pain (CLBP) have increased substantially over the past few decades. Despite extensive research, a consistently valid, reliable and effective diagnostic and treatment regime for CLBP is yet to be determined. ASSESSMENT OF PROBLEM: This paper presents an established interdisciplinary rehabilitation model for CLBP initially developed by the Canadian Back Institute. An audit describes the symptomatic, functional and vocational outcomes achieved for patients who attended the programme over three years throughout a national network of primary health care facilities in New Zealand. RESULTS: Over a three-year period, 899 patients with CLBP completed their rehabilitation programme at one of eight affiliated clinics. Of the 899 patients discharged, 780 (86.8%) reported that their back pain had gone or reduced at the end of their rehabilitation. There was a statistically significant, and clinically relevant, improvement in both average pain and subjective functional scores from baseline assessment levels to discharge and follow-up scores (p<0.001). STRATEGIES FOR IMPROVEMENT: Previous studies have shown that functional rehabilitation can improve outcomes in individuals with CLBP. This audit provides further support for the development of interdisciplinary functional rehabilitation programmes to help manage CLBP within the community. LESSONS: The routine measurement of symptomatic, functional and vocational outcomes throughout the rehabilitation process can assist in quantifying the effect of treatment and providing evidence of value for patients, stakeholders and funding groups.
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 | 0.003 | 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".