The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A systematic review on the effectiveness of pharmacological interventions for chronic non-specific low-back pain
Open accessAbstract
The objective of this review was to determine the effectiveness of pharmacological interventions [i.e., non-steroid anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), muscle relaxants, antidepressants, and opioids] for non-specific chronic low-back pain (LBP). Existing Cochrane reviews for the four interventions were screened for studies fulfilling the inclusion criteria. Then, the literature searches were updated. Only randomized controlled trials on adults (≥18 years) with chronic (≥12 weeks) non-specific LBP and evaluation of at least one of the main clinically relevant outcome measures (pain, functional status, perceived recovery, or return to work) were included. The GRADE approach was used to determine the quality of evidence. A total of 17 randomized controlled trials was included: NSAIDs (n = 4), antidepressants (n = 5), and opioids (n = 8). No studies were found for muscle relaxants; 14 studies had a low risk of bias. The studies only reported effects on the short term (<3 months). The overall quality of the evidence was low. NSAIDs and opioids seem to lead to a somewhat higher relief in pain on the short term, as compared to placebo, in patients with non-specific chronic low back pain; opioids seem to have a small effect in improving function for a selection of patients who responded with an exacerbation of their symptoms after stopping their medication. However, both types of medication show more adverse effects than placebo. There seems to be no difference in effect between antidepressants and placebo in patients with non-specific chronic LBP.
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
Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations
(2004) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.328.7454.1490 · Cited by 8,477
2009 updated method guidelines for systematic reviews in the Cochrane Back Review Group
Furlan, A. D., Pennick, V., Bombardier, C., & van Tulder, M. (2009) · Spine · doi:10.1097/brs.0b013e3181b1c99f · Cited by 1,663
meta-analysis bias in location and selection of studies
Egger, M., & Smith, G. D. (1998) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.316.7124.61 · Cited by 1,374
Cited by
Breivik, H., Eisenberg, E., & O’Brien, T. (2013) · BMC Public Health · doi:10.1186/1471-2458-13-1229 · Cited by 643
Management of functional somatic syndromes and bodily distress
Henningsen, P., Zipfel, S., Sattel, H., & Creed, F. (2018) · Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics · doi:10.1159/000484413 · Cited by 335
Chenot, J.-F., Greitemann, B., Kladny, B., Petzke, F., Pfingsten, M., & Schorr, S. G. (2017) · Deutsches Ärzteblatt international · doi:10.3238/arztebl.2017.0883 · Cited by 282
Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for spinal pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Machado, G. C., Maher, C. G., Ferreira, P. H., Day, R. O., Pinheiro, M. B., & Ferreira, M. L. (2017) · Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases · doi:10.1136/annrheumdis-2016-210597 · Cited by 199
Risk factor assessment for problematic use of opioids for chronic pain
Jamison, R. N., & Edwards, R. R. (2013) · The Clinical Neuropsychologist · doi:10.1080/13854046.2012.715204 · Cited by 42
Metadata
- Authors
- Kuijpers, T., van Middelkoop, M., Rubinstein, S. M., Ostelo, R., Verhagen, A., Koes, B. W., & van Tulder, M. W.
- Venue
- European Spine Journal
- Published
- 2010-07-31
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 40-50
- ISSN
- 0940-6719 (ISSN-L)
- 1432-0932
- OpenAlex
- W2171947966
- Cited by
- 220
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 2.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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: A systematic review on the effectiveness of pharmacological interventions for chronic non-specific low-back pain. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s00586-010-1541-4
- The paper
- Kuijpers, T., van Middelkoop, M., Rubinstein, S. M., Ostelo, R., Verhagen, A., Koes, B. W., & van Tulder, M. W. (2011). A systematic review on the effectiveness of pharmacological interventions for chronic non-specific low-back pain. European Spine Journal. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-010-1541-4
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.