MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387261481 · doi:10.2147/jpr.s425672

Trends of Low Back Pain Research in Older and Working-Age Adults from 1993 to 2023: A Bibliometric Analysis

2023· review· en· W4387261481 on OpenAlexafffund
Daniel J. Zheng, Gregory N. Kawchuk, André Bussières, Fadi Al Zoubi, Jan Hartvigsen, Siu Ngor Fu, Katie de Luca, Debra K. Weiner, Jaro Karppinen, Dino Samartzis, Manuela L. Ferreira, Jinlong Wu, Liz Dennett, Arnold Yu Lok Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pain Research · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresMcGill UniversityUniversity of Alberta
FundersMcGill University
KeywordsMedicineGerontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: Although the number of publications focusing on low back pain in older adults (LBP-O) and working-age adults (LBP-W) has been growing for decades, comparative research trends in these two populations, which may help to guide future investigation, have not been rigorously explored. This analysis aimed to describe publication patterns and trends of research targeting LBP-O and LBP-W over the last three decades. Peer-reviewed LBP-O and LBP-W articles published between 1993 and 2023 were retrieved from the Web of Science, which provided the details of annual publication volume, and prominent journals/countries/institutions. The relationship between the annual publication volumes and years was analyzed by Spearman correlation analysis. The hot topics and emerging trends were analyzed by VOSviewer and CiteSpace, respectively. A total of 4217 LBP-O-related and 50,559 LBP-W-related documents were included. The annual publication volumes of LBP-O and LBP-W articles increased over the years ( r =0.995 to 0.998, p < 0.001). The United States had the highest number of prominent institutions publishing relevant articles. The most prolific journal for LBP-O (5.4%) and LBP-W-related (6.1%) papers is the journal “Spine”. Cognitive behavioral therapy, intervertebral disc (IVD) degeneration, physiotherapy, physical activity, and walking were the recent hot topics and physical activity was an emerging trend in LBP-O, while surgery and IVD degeneration (also a hot topic) were emerging trends in LBP-W. This study highlights the paucity of LBP-O-related research in the past. The United States and the journal Spine stand out in LBP research. The research trend of physical activity in LBP-O is consistent with the recognized importance of physical activity for older adults in general, and for managing LBP-O in particular. Conversely, the emerging trends of surgery and intervertebral disc degeneration in LBP-W research highlight a focus on the biomedical model of LBP despite LBP being a biopsychosocial condition. Keywords: low back pain, older adults, working-age adults, bibliometrics, intervertebral disc degeneration, physical activity, surgery

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)0.106
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Bibliometrics, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch, Bibliometrics
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.924
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1060.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.3220.369
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.213
GPT teacher head0.505
Teacher spread0.292 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations23
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pain ResearchSame topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationFrench-language works237,207