The DOI matches its Crossref record; 46 of the 46 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Association Between Compensation Status and Outcome After Surgery: A Meta-analysis
Abstract
CONTEXT: Compensation, whether through workers' compensation or through litigation, has been associated with poor outcome after surgery; however, this association has not been examined by meta-analysis. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association between compensation status and outcome after surgery. DATA SOURCES: We searched MEDLINE (1966-2003), EMBASE (1980-2003), CINAHL, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, and reference lists of retrieved articles and textbooks, and we contacted experts in the field. STUDY SELECTION: The review included any trial of surgical intervention in which compensation status was reported and results were compared according to that status. No restrictions were placed on study design, language, or publication date. Studies were selected by 2 unblinded independent reviewers. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently extracted data on study type, study quality, surgical procedure, outcome, country of origin, length and completeness of follow-up, and compensation type. DATA SYNTHESIS: Two hundred eleven studies satisfied the inclusion criteria. Of these, 175 stated that the presence of compensation (workers' compensation with or without litigation) was associated with a worse outcome, 35 found no difference or did not describe a difference, and 1 described a benefit associated with compensation. A meta-analysis of 129 studies with available data (n = 20,498 patients) revealed the summary odds ratio for an unsatisfactory outcome in compensated patients to be 3.79 (95% confidence interval, 3.28-4.37 by random-effects model). Grouping studies by country, procedure, length of follow-up, completeness of follow-up, study type, and type of compensation showed the association to be consistent for all subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Compensation status is associated with poor outcome after surgery. This effect is significant, clinically important, and consistent. Because data were obtained from observational studies and were not homogeneous, the summary effect should be interpreted with caution. Compensation status should be considered a potential confounder in all studies of surgical intervention. Determination of the mechanism for this association requires further study.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses
Higgins, J. P. T., Thompson, S. G., Deeks, J. J., & Altman, D. G. (2003) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557 · Cited by 63,139
(1992) · PubMed · Cited by 33,716
Banaszkiewicz, P. A. (2014) · Classic Papers in Orthopaedics · doi:10.1007/978-1-4471-5451-8_3 · Cited by 5,038
Egger, M., Jüni, P., Bartlett, C., Holenstein, F., & Sterne, J. (2003) · Health Technology Assessment · doi:10.3310/hta7010 · Cited by 1,181
McAuley, L., Pham, B., Tugwell, P., & Moher, D. (2000) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(00)02786-0 · Cited by 812
BUCKLEY, R., TOUGH, S., MCCORMACK, R., PATE, G., LEIGHTON, R., PETRIE, D., & GALPIN, R. (2002) · The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery-American Volume · doi:10.2106/00004623-200210000-00001 · Cited by 768
Cassidy, J. D., Carroll, L. J., Côté, P., Lemstra, M., Berglund, A., & Nygren, Å. (2000) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm200004203421606 · Cited by 721
(1996) · American Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1176/ajp.153.1.7 · Cited by 528
Scholten-Peeters, G. G. M., Verhagen, A. P., Bekkering, G. E., van der Windt, D. A. W. M., Barnsley, L., Oostendorp, R. A. B., & Hendriks, E. J. M. (2003) · Pain · doi:10.1016/s0304-3959(03)00050-2 · Cited by 430
Natural evolution of late whiplash syndrome outside the medicolegal context
Schrader, H., Bovim, G., Sand, T., Obelieniene, D., Siurkiene, D., Mickevičiene, D., & Misevičiene, I. (1996) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(96)90733-3 · Cited by 415
Cited by
Ekegren, C. L., Edwards, E. R., De Steiger, R., & Gabbe, B. J. (2018) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph15122845 · Cited by 305
System influences on work disability due to low back pain: An international evidence synthesis
Bartys, S., Frederiksen, P., Bendix, T., & Burton, K. (2017) · Health Policy · doi:10.1016/j.healthpol.2017.05.011 · Cited by 75
Yao, L., Sadeghirad, B., Li, M., Li, J., Wang, Q., Crandon, H. N., Martin, G., Morgan, R., Florez, I. D., Hunskaar, B. S., et al. (2023) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj-2023-076226 · Cited by 57
Ioannou, L. J., Cameron, P. A., Gibson, S. J., Gabbe, B. J., Ponsford, J., Jennings, P. A., Arnold, C. A., Gwini, S. M., Georgiou-Karistianis, N., & Giummarra, M. J. (2017) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0178894 · Cited by 42
Pain management in musculoskeletal conditions
Nicholas, M. K. (2008) · Best Practice & Research Clinical Rheumatology · doi:10.1016/j.berh.2007.11.008 · Cited by 34
Metadata
- Authors
- Harris, I., Mulford, J., Solomon, M., van Gelder, J. M., & Young, J.
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2005-04-06
- Volume
- 293
- Issue
- 13
- Pages
- 1644
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W2012009286
- Cited by
- 354
- References
- 46
- FWCI
- 9.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Association Between Compensation Status and Outcome After Surgery: A Meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.293.13.1644
- The paper
- Harris, I., Mulford, J., Solomon, M., van Gelder, J. M., & Young, J. (2005). Association Between Compensation Status and Outcome After Surgery: A Meta-analysis. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.293.13.1644
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
