OBJECTIVE: To summarize the methodological quality and developmental stage of prediction models for musculoskeletal complaints that are relevant for physical therapists in primary care. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A systematic literature search was carried out in the databases of Medline, Embase, and Cinahl. Studies on prediction models for musculoskeletal complaints that can be used by primary care physical therapists were included. Methodological quality of the studies was assessed and relevant study characteristics were extracted. RESULTS: The search retrieved 4,702 references of which 29 studies were included in this review. The study quality of the included studies showed substantial variation. The studied populations consisted mostly of back (n=10) and neck pain (n=6) patients, and patients with knee complaints (n=4). Most studies (n=22) used "perceived recovery" as primary outcome. Most prediction models (n=18) were at the derivation level of development. CONCLUSIONS: Many prediction models are available for a wide range of patient populations. The developmental stage of most models is preliminary and the study quality is often moderate. We do not recommend physiotherapist to use these models yet. All models reviewed here are in the developmental stage and need validation and impact evaluation before using them in daily practice.
OBJECTIVE: To summarize the methodological quality and developmental stage of prediction models for musculoskeletal complaints that are relevant for physical therapists in primary care. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A systematic literature search was carried out in the databases of Medline, Embase, and Cinahl. Studies on prediction models for musculoskeletal complaints that can be used by primary care physical therapists were included. Methodological quality of the studies was assessed and relevant study characteristics were extracted. RESULTS: The search retrieved 4,702 references of which 29 studies were included in this review. The study quality of the included studies showed substantial variation. The studied populations consisted mostly of back (n=10) and neck pain (n=6) patients, and patients with knee complaints (n=4). Most studies (n=22) used "perceived recovery" as primary outcome. Most prediction models (n=18) were at the derivation level of development. CONCLUSIONS: Many prediction models are available for a wide range of patient populations. The developmental stage of most models is preliminary and the study quality is often moderate. We do not recommend physiotherapist to use these models yet. All models reviewed here are in the developmental stage and need validation and impact evaluation before using them in daily practice.
Authors: Lene Aasdahl; Fredrik Granviken; Ingebrigt Meisingset; Astrid Woodhouse; Kari Anne I Evensen; Ottar Vasseljen Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2021-05-19 Impact factor: 2.362
Authors: Alison B Rushton; David W Evans; Nicola Middlebrook; Nicola R Heneghan; Charlotte Small; Janet Lord; Jaimin M Patel; Deborah Falla Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2018-04-28 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Alison B Rushton; Martin L Verra; Andrew Emms; Nicola R Heneghan; Deborah Falla; Michael Reddington; Ashley A Cole; Paul Willems; Lorin Benneker; David Selvey; Michael Hutton; Martijn W Heymans; J Bart Staal Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2018-05-22 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Joan Kelly; Michele Sterling; Trudy Rebbeck; Aila Nica Bandong; Andrew Leaver; Martin Mackey; Carrie Ritchie Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2017-08-11 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Peter Kent; Carol Cancelliere; Eleanor Boyle; J David Cassidy; Alice Kongsted Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2020-06-29 Impact factor: 4.615