INTRODUCTION: Screening procedures based on prognostic data are an important prerequisite for prevention of disability due to low-back pain. This paper reviews the research on prognosis to delineate the most pertinent research challenges, and outlines directions for future research to improve the scientific quality and screening accuracy of prognostic efforts. METHODS: Reviews of prognosis research were examined to identify key methodological and research issues. RESULTS: Certain issues such as sampling procedures, research designs, data analyses, prognostic indicators, and follow-up procedures limit the value of prior studies. Absence of a clear conceptual framework hampers interpretation of findings and moving research questions forward. The recurrent nature of back pain and the need to effectively include the impact of employer actions and the job market were also identified as significant issues. CONCLUSIONS: Future research will be enhanced by addressing conceptual and definitional issues, applying tested and sensible measures, and careful follow-up of the study population.
INTRODUCTION: Screening procedures based on prognostic data are an important prerequisite for prevention of disability due to low-back pain. This paper reviews the research on prognosis to delineate the most pertinent research challenges, and outlines directions for future research to improve the scientific quality and screening accuracy of prognostic efforts. METHODS: Reviews of prognosis research were examined to identify key methodological and research issues. RESULTS: Certain issues such as sampling procedures, research designs, data analyses, prognostic indicators, and follow-up procedures limit the value of prior studies. Absence of a clear conceptual framework hampers interpretation of findings and moving research questions forward. The recurrent nature of back pain and the need to effectively include the impact of employer actions and the job market were also identified as significant issues. CONCLUSIONS: Future research will be enhanced by addressing conceptual and definitional issues, applying tested and sensible measures, and careful follow-up of the study population.
Authors: P Loisel; J Lemaire; S Poitras; M-J Durand; F Champagne; S Stock; B Diallo; C Tremblay Journal: Occup Environ Med Date: 2002-12 Impact factor: 4.402
Authors: Galina Velikova; Laura Booth; Adam B Smith; Paul M Brown; Pamela Lynch; Julia M Brown; Peter J Selby Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2004-02-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Silje Endresen Reme; William S Shaw; Ivan A Steenstra; Mary Jane Woiszwillo; Glenn Pransky; Steven J Linton Journal: J Occup Rehabil Date: 2012-12