Prevalence of Neuropathic Pain and Patient-Reported Outcomes in Korean Adults with Chronic Low Back Pain Resulting from Neuropathic Low Back Pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Study Design A noninterventional, multicenter, cross-sectional study. Purpose We investigated the prevalence of neuropathic pain (NP) and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of the quality of life (QoL) and functional disability in Korean adults with chronic low back pain (CLBP). Overview of Literature Among patients with CLBP, 20%–55% had NP. Methods Patients older than 20 years with CLBP lasting for longer than three months, with a visual analog scale (VAS) pain score higher than four, and with pain medications being used for at least four weeks before enrollment were recruited from 27 general hospitals between December 2014 and May 2015. Medical chart reviews were performed to collect demographic/clinical features and diagnosis of NP (douleur neuropathique 4, DN4). The QoL (EuroQoL 5-dimension, EQ-5D; EQ-VAS) and functional disability (Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale, QBPDS) were determined through patient surveys. Multiple linear regression analyses were performed to compare PROs between the NP (DN4≥4) and non-NP (DN4<4) groups. Results A total of 1,200 patients (females: 65.7%; mean age: 63.4±13.0 years) were enrolled. The mean scores of EQ-5D, EQ-VAS, and QBPDS were 0.5±0.3, 55.7±19.4, and 40.4±21.1, respectively. Among all patients, 492 (41.0%; 95% confidence interval, 38.2%–43.8%) suffered from NP. The prevalence of NP was higher in male patients (46.8%; p<0.01), in patients who had pain based on radiological and neurological findings (59.0%; p<0.01), and in patients who had severe pain (49.0%; p<0.01). There were significant mean differences in EQ-5D (NP group vs. non-NP group: 0.4±0.3 vs. 0.5±0.3; p<0.01) and QBPDS (NP group vs. non-NP group: 45.8±21.2 vs. 36.3±20.2; p<0.01) scores. In the multiple linear regression, patients with NP showed lower EQ-5D (β=−0.1; p<0.01) and higher QBPDS (β=7.0; p<0.01) scores than those without NP. Conclusions NP was highly prevalent in Korean patients with CLBP. Patients with CLBP having NP had a lower QoL and more severe dysfunction than those without NP. To enhance the QoL and functional status of patients with CLBP, this study highlights the importance of appropriately diagnosing and treating NP.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".