↓ Skip to main content

Failure to define low back pain as a disease or an episode renders research on causality unsuitable: results of a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Chiropractic & Manual Therapies, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
24 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
96 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
Failure to define low back pain as a disease or an episode renders research on causality unsuitable: results of a systematic review
Published in
Chiropractic & Manual Therapies, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12998-017-0172-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Emad M. Ardakani, Charlotte Leboeuf-Yde, Bruce F. Walker

Abstract

Causative factors may be different for the very first onset of symptoms of the 'disease' of low back pain (LBP) than for ensuing episodes that occur after a pain-free period. This differentiation hinges on a life-time absence of low back pain at first onset and short-term absence for further episodes. In this systematic review, we explored whether researchers make these distinctions when investigating the causality of LBP. A literature search of PUBMED, CINAHL, and SCOPUS databases was performed from January 2010 until September 2016 using the search terms 'low back pain' or 'back pain' and 'risk factor' or 'caus*' or 'predict*' or 'onset' or 'first-time' or 'inception' or 'incidence'. Two reviewers extracted information on study design, types of episodes of back pain to distinguish the disease of LBP and recurring episodes, and also to determine the definitions of disease- or pain-free periods. Thirty-three articles purporting to study causes of LBP were included. Upon scrutiny, 31 of the 33 articles were unclear as to what type of causality they were studying, that of the 'disease' or the episode, or a mere association with LBP. Only 9 studies used a prospective study design. Five studies appeared to investigate the onset of the disease of LBP, however, only one study truly captured the first incidence of LBP, which was the result of sports injury. Six appeared to study episodes but only one clearly related to the concept of episodes. Therefore, among those 11 studies, nine included both first-time LBP and episodes of LBP. Consequently, 22 studies related to the prevalence of LBP, as they probably included a mixture of first-time, recurring and ongoing episodes without distinction. Recent literature concerning the causality of LBP does not differentiate between the 'disease' of LBP and its recurring episodes mainly due to a lack of a clear definition of absence of LBP at baseline. Therefore, current research is not capable of providing a valid answer on this topic.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 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 96 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 96 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 13%
Student > Bachelor 12 13%
Student > Master 9 9%
Other 8 8%
Unspecified 5 5%
Other 22 23%
Unknown 28 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 32 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 16%
Sports and Recreations 6 6%
Unspecified 5 5%
Psychology 2 2%
Other 7 7%
Unknown 29 30%