↓ Skip to main content

Brief pain re-assessment provided more accurate prognosis than baseline information for low-back or shoulder pain

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Readers on

mendeley
56 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Brief pain re-assessment provided more accurate prognosis than baseline information for low-back or shoulder pain
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, April 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12891-017-1502-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

G. Mansell, K. P. Jordan, G. M. Peat, K. M. Dunn, D. Lasserson, T. Kuijpers, I. Swinkels-Meewisse, D. A. W. M. van der Windt

Abstract

Research investigating prognosis in musculoskeletal pain conditions has only been moderately successful in predicting which patients are unlikely to recover. Clinical decision making could potentially be improved by combining information taken at baseline and re-consultation. Data from four prospective clinical cohorts of adults presenting to UK and Dutch primary care with low-back or shoulder pain was analysed, assessing long-term disability at 6 or 12 months and including baseline and 4-6 week assessments of pain. Baseline versus short-term assessments of pain, and previously validated multivariable prediction models versus repeat assessment, were compared to assess predictive performance of long-term disability outcome. A hypothetical clinical scenario was explored which made efficient use of both baseline and repeated assessment to identify patients likely to have a poor prognosis and decide on further treatment. Short-term repeat assessment of pain was better than short-term change or baseline score at predicting long-term disability improvement across all cohorts. Short-term repeat assessment of pain was only slightly more predictive of long-term recovery (c-statistics 0.78, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.83 and 0.75, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.82) than a multivariable baseline prognostic model in the two cohorts presenting such a model (c-statistics 0.71, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.76 and 0.72, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.78). Combining optimal prediction at baseline using a multivariable prognostic model with short-term repeat assessment of pain in those with uncertain prognosis in a hypothetical clinical scenario resulted in reduction in the number of patients with an uncertain probability of recovery, thereby reducing the instances where patients may be inappropriately referred or reassured. Incorporating short-term repeat assessment of pain into prognostic models could potentially optimise the clinical usefulness of prognostic information.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 56 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 11 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 18%
Student > Master 7 13%
Librarian 5 9%
Researcher 4 7%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 11 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 17 30%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 16%
Sports and Recreations 3 5%
Neuroscience 2 4%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 18 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 18 December 2017.
All research outputs
#12,972,913
of 22,962,258 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#1,749
of 4,085 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#148,183
of 308,980 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#39
of 74 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,962,258 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,085 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 308,980 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 74 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.