MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3211556891 · doi:10.1016/j.xnsj.2021.100092

Predictors of response following standardized education and self-management recommendations for low back pain stratified by dominant pain location

2021· article· en· W3211556891 on OpenAlexafffund
Anthony V. Perruccio, Jessica T. Y. Wong, Elizabeth M. Badley, J. Denise Power, Calvin Yip, Y. Raja Rampersaud

Bibliographic record

VenueNorth American Spine Society Journal (NASSJ) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsResearch CanadaCanadian Arthritis NetworkPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term CareArthritis SocietyToronto General and Western Hospital FoundationMedtronic
KeywordsMedicinePhysical therapyLogistic regressionLow back painComorbidityBody mass indexOswestry Disability IndexBack painStraight leg raiseInternal medicineRange of motionAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) is a leading cause of disability globally. Risk-stratification systems (e.g. STarT Back) have been proposed to guide treatment, but with varying success. We investigated factors associated with poor response to standardized LBP education and self-management recommendations stratified by dominant pain location (back or leg). METHODS: LBP patients underwent a standardized primary care model of care of education and self-management recommendations. Poor response was defined as an Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) change score <10 units by 6 months. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify poor response risk factors, stratified by back-dominant and leg-dominant back pain. Baseline factors: age, sex, body mass index, ODI, LBP/leg-pain intensity, LBP/leg-pain duration, STarT Back chronicity-risk, smoking, comorbidity count, and self-efficacy. RESULTS: The sample consisted of 767 patients (443 back-dominant, 324 leg-dominant). Mean age was 53 years, and 59% were female. Females accounted for 66% of back-dominant and 50% of leg-dominant patients. Chronicity risk was 'high' for 18% of back-dominant and 29% of leg-dominant patients. Poor response was higher in back- (57%) compared to leg-dominant (42%) patients. Adjusted stratified analyses: female sex, moderate or high chronicity-risk, and increasing age were associated with increased risk of poor response, and greater self-efficacy with favourable response, in leg-dominant patients; these were not the cases among back-dominant patients. Increased comorbidity count was associated with poor response in back dominant patients. In both patient groups, higher baseline ODI score was associated with favorable response, and smoking and longer pain duration with poor response. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in the influence of sex and chronicity risk in particular on outcome by dominant pain location suggests that considering these patients as a single group may not be appropriate. Furthermore, findings suggest that stratification by pain dominance may enhance the use of established risk stratification tools such as the STarT Back.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.642
Threshold uncertainty score0.655

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNorth American Spine Society Journal (NASSJ)Same topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationFrench-language works237,207