↓ Skip to main content

Screening for malignancy in low back pain patients: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in European Spine Journal, June 2007
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#45 of 4,978)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
blogs
3 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
82 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
243 Mendeley
connotea
1 Connotea
Title
Screening for malignancy in low back pain patients: a systematic review
Published in
European Spine Journal, June 2007
DOI 10.1007/s00586-007-0412-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicholas Henschke, Christopher G. Maher, Kathryn M. Refshauge

Abstract

To describe the accuracy of clinical features and tests used to screen for malignancy in patients with low back pain. A systematic review was performed on all available records on MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL electronic databases. Studies were considered eligible if they investigated a cohort of low back pain patients, used an appropriate reference standard, and reported sufficient data on the diagnostic accuracy of tests. Two authors independently assessed methodological quality and extracted data to calculate positive (LR+) and negative (LR-) likelihood ratios. Six studies evaluating 22 different clinical features and tests were identified. The prevalence of malignancy ranged from 0.1 to 3.5%. A previous history of cancer (LR+ = 23.7), elevated ESR (LR+ = 18.0), reduced hematocrit (LR+ = 18.2), and overall clinician judgement (LR+ = 12.1) increased the probability of malignancy when present. A combination of age > or =50 years, a previous history of cancer, unexplained weight loss, and failure to improve after 1 month had a reported sensitivity of 100%. Overall, there was poor reporting of methodological quality items, and very few studies were performed in community primary care settings. Malignancy is rare as a cause of low back pain. The most useful features and tests are a previous history of cancer, elevated ESR, reduced hematocrit, and clinician judgement.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 243 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 2%
Australia 3 1%
Italy 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 234 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 43 18%
Other 36 15%
Student > Master 32 13%
Student > Postgraduate 23 9%
Researcher 21 9%
Other 59 24%
Unknown 29 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 131 54%
Nursing and Health Professions 43 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 4%
Sports and Recreations 8 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 1%
Other 17 7%
Unknown 32 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 69. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 June 2023.
All research outputs
#574,550
of 24,213,825 outputs
Outputs from European Spine Journal
#45
of 4,978 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#833
of 72,294 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Spine Journal
#2
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,213,825 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,978 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 72,294 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.