Cited by 59Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationHealth Sciences Research and EducationSpine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology

Lack of Evidence-Based Research for Idiopathic Low Back Pain: The Importance of a Specific Diagnosis

Abraham, Irwin, Killackey-Jones, Brenda·2002·Archives of Internal Medicine

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/archinte.162.13.1442

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Abraham, I., & Killackey-Jones, B.
Affiliations
University of Rochester Medicine (US)
Venue
Archives of Internal Medicine
Published
2002-07-08
Volume
162
Issue
13
Pages
1442
ISSN
0003-9926 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1978028500
Cited by
59
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 1
FWCI
0.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Archives of Internal Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Sciences Research and Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Spine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
Keywords
idiopathic low back pain, evidence-based medicine, research evidence, low back pain management
MeSH terms
Diagnosis, Differential, Humans, Low Back Pain, Evidence-Based Medicine

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review