MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2918152725 · doi:10.1002/pmrj.12000

Ultrasound Measures of the Abdominal Wall in Patients with Low Back Pain Before and After an 8‐week Lumbar Stabilization Exercise Program, and Their Association With Clinical Outcomes

2019· article· en· W2918152725 on OpenAlexaff
Christian Larivière, Sharon M. Henry, Dany H. Gagnon, Richard Preuss, Jean‐Pierre Dumas

Bibliographic record

VenuePM&R · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeUniversité de MontréalCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in RehabilitationMcGill UniversityInstitut de recherche Robert-Sauvé en santé et en sécurité du travail
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLow back painPhysical therapyLumbarClinical trialPhysical medicine and rehabilitationSurgeryInternal medicineAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Lumbar stabilization exercise programs (LSEPs) act positively on clinical outcome measures in patients with low back pain (LBP), but the underlying mechanisms are not well understood. Among the various neuromuscular mechanisms, a good candidate is better activation of the abdominal wall, as measured with rehabilitative ultrasound imaging (RUSI). OBJECTIVES: To determine whether RUSI measures are (1) sensitive to LBP status and treatment (LSEP) and (2) correlate with clinical outcomes following the LSEP. DESIGN: An exploratory one-arm clinical trial with healthy participants as a control group. SETTING: LSEP was delivered in a clinical setting; outcomes were measured in a laboratory setting. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-one patients with nonacute LBP and 30 healthy controls. METHODS: Outcome measures were performed before and after an 8-week LSEP in patients with LBP, and with the same time interval for control participants to compare with patients at baseline. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Pain, disability, as well as static (at rest) and dynamic (percent thickness change) RUSI measures for abdominal muscles (transversus abdominis, internal oblique [IO], and external oblique [EO]). RESULTS: Patients did not produce systematic changes in RUSI measures relative to controls, even if patients had significant improvement in pain and disability. However, the correlational analyses between the absolute change (pre- to post-LSEP) (1) of EO and IO thickness (in mm) at rest (bilaterally), and (2) in pain following the LSEP were significant and consistent (range: .36-.45) in patients. CONCLUSIONS: Although positive clinical improvements were observed following LSEP, there were minimal systematic changes in RUSI measures, likely because patients were not different from controls at baseline. Correlational analyses, however, indicated that greater reductions in pain were associated with reduced thickness of the EO and IO following the LSEP, suggesting the presence of some heterogeneity (or clinical subgroups) among the patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.220

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations13
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePM&RSame topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationFrench-language works237,207