Cited by 84Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationOccupational Health and Safety in WorkplacesErgonomics and Musculoskeletal Disorders

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 71 of the 72 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Occupations associated with a high risk of self-reported back pain: representative outcomes of a back pain prevalence study in the Federal Republic of Germany

Open access
Schneider, Sven, Lipinski, Slawomira, Schiltenwolf, Marcus·2006·European Spine Journal

Abstract

Given the increasing medical and economic implications of back pain, occupation-specific prevalence data may provide important pointers for preventive programmes targeted at promoting preventive behaviour and improving conditions. The National German Health Survey is the first study to provide the basis for a representative nationwide analysis of back pain prevalence by occupational category. The net sample comprises a total of 3,488 earners aged 18-69. One in three earners in the Federal Republic of Germany (34%) experienced back pain during the 7 days prior to being interviewed. The 1-year prevalence rate is 60%. Occupational categories associated with a lower-than-average back pain prevalence are highly qualified professionals, senior management, and production occupations associated with a comparatively low degree of manual labour. In contrast, an above-average prevalence was identified for occupations associated with physically strenuous work involving one-sided postures, moving, carrying and holding heavy weights, and work typically performed in poor conditions or bad weather. Our data demonstrates significant inter-occupational differences in terms of self-reported back pain. The results underline the importance of measures to promote preventive behaviour and improve the working conditions of those in low-skill manual labour occupations.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00586-005-1015-2

Cites

71 of 71 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

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

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 72 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Bellach BM, Knopf H, Thefeld W (1998) Der Bundes-Gesundheitssurvey 1997/98. Gesundheitswesen 60:59–68
  2. Hasenbring M (2001) Biopsychosoziale Grundlagen der Chronifizierung am Beispiel von Rückenschmerzen. In: Zenz M, Jurna I (eds) Lehrbuch der Schmerztherapie. Wissenschaftliche Verlagsgesellschaft, Stuttgart, pp 185–196
  3. Kohlmann T (2001) Bevölkerungsbezogene Epidemiologie am Beispiel chronischer Rückenschmerzen. In: Jurna I, Zenz M (eds) Lehrbuch der Schmerztherapie. Wissenschaftliche Verlagsgesellschaft, Stuttgart, pp 221–229
  4. Thefeld W, Stolzenberg H, Bellach BM (1999) Bundes-Gesundheitssurvey: Response, Zusammensetzung der Teilnehmer und Non-Responder-Analyse. Gesundheitswesen 61(Spec No):S57–S61
  5. Winkler G, Filipiak B, Hense HW, Schwertner B (1998) Externe Qualitätskontrolle im Bundes-Gesundheitssurvey 1997/98: Konzept und erste Erfahrungen. Gesundheitswesen 60:108–112
  6. Zoller S (2005) Medizinische und soziale Risikofaktoren des Rückenschmerzes. Dissertation. Orthopädische Universitatsklinik, Heidelberg

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Schneider, S., Lipinski, S., & Schiltenwolf, M.
Affiliations
  • Heidelberg University (DE)
  • Central Institute of Mental Health (DE)
Corresponding author
Schneider, Sven
Venue
European Spine Journal
Published
2006-01-24
Volume
15
Issue
6
Pages
821-833
ISSN
  • 0940-6719 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-0932
OpenAlex
W2097283457
Cited by
84
References
72
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 6
FWCI
2.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • European Spine Journal (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Universität Heidelberg
  • Robert Koch Institut
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Occupational Health and Safety in Workplaces
  • Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Ergonomics and Musculoskeletal Disorders
Keywords
back pain, occupational differences, prevalence, manual labor, work-related musculoskeletal disorders, working conditions, prevention, Federal Republic of Germany
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Back Pain, Female, Germany, Health Surveys, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Occupational Diseases, Occupations, Risk Factors, Socioeconomic Factors, Reproducibility of Results

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