MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4393384096 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0294830

The biopsychosocial factors associated with development of chronic musculoskeletal pain. An umbrella review and meta-analysis of observational systematic reviews

2024· review· en· W4393384096 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Dunn, Alison Rushton, Jai Mistry, Andrew Soundy, Nicola R Heneghan

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersSt. George's, University of London
KeywordsBiopsychosocial modelMedicineSystematic reviewMeta-analysisPsycINFOObservational studyChronic painMEDLINECochrane LibraryOdds ratioCINAHLPublication biasPhysical therapyPsychiatryInternal medicinePsychological intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: The aim of this umbrella review was to establish which biopsychosocial factors are associated with development of chronic musculoskeletal pain. METHODS: Ovid Medline, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, PsycINFO, CINAHL, PEDro, PROSPERO, Google Scholar and grey literature were searched from database inception to 4th April 2023. Systematic reviews of observational prospective longitudinal studies, including populations with <3 months (not chronic) musculoskeletal pain, investigating biopsychosocial factors that contribute to development of chronic (>3 months) musculoskeletal pain. Two reviewers searched the literature, assessed risk of bias (Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews-2), and evaluated quality (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) to provide an overall statement on the certainty of evidence for each biopsychosocial factor. Data analysis was performed through random effects meta-analysis (including meta-analysis of meta-analyses where possible) and descriptive synthesis. RESULTS: 13 systematic reviews were included comprising 185 original research studies (n = 489,644 participants). Thirty-four biopsychosocial factors are associated with development of chronic musculoskeletal pain. Meta-analyses of odds and/or likelihood ratios were possible for 25 biopsychosocial factors. There is moderate certainty evidence that smoking (OR 1.24 [95%CI, 1.14-1.34), fear avoidance (LR+ 2.11 [95%CI, 1.59-2.8]; LR- 0.5 [95%CI, 0.35-0.71]) poorer support networks (OR 1.21 [95%CI, 1.14-1.29]), lower socioeconomic status (OR 2.0 [95%CI, 1.64-2.42]), and high levels of pain (OR 5.61 [95%CI, 3.74-8.43]) are associated with development of chronic musculoskeletal pain (all P<0.001). Remaining factors are of low or very low certainty evidence. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: There is moderate certainty evidence that smoking, fear avoidance, poorer support networks, lower socioeconomic status, and high levels of pain are associated with development of chronic musculoskeletal pain. High risk of bias was evident in most included reviews; this highlights the need for higher quality systematic reviews.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.099
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.208
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.523

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0990.208
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0180.031
Bibliometrics0.0180.013
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.315
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.080 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
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

Citations43
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation→French-language works237,207→