The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Factors defining care‐seeking in low back pain – A meta‐analysis of population based surveys
Abstract
Little is known about factors determining health care‐seeking behavior in low back pain. While a number of studies have described general characteristics of health care utilization, only a few have aimed at appropriately assessing determinants of care‐seeking in back pain, by comparing seekers and non‐seekers. The objective of this systematic review was to identify determinants of health care‐seeking in studies with well‐defined groups of care‐seekers and non‐seekers with non‐specific low back pain. A search was conducted in Medline, AMED, Cinahl, Web of Science, PsycINFO, National Research Register, Cochrane Library and LILACS looking for population‐ based surveys of non‐specific low back pain patients older than 18 years, published since 1966. To be included in the review, studies needed to report on characteristics of well‐defined groups of care‐seekers and non‐seekers. Methodological quality was assessed using a criteria list based on sampling, response rate, data reproducibility, power calculation and external validity. Risk estimates were expressed as odd ratios (95% confidence intervals). When possible, meta‐analyses were performed, using a random effects model. Eleven studies were included in the review. Pooled results show that women are slightly more likely to seek care for their back pain as are patients with a previous history of back pain. Pain intensity was only slightly associated with care‐seeking, whereas patients with high levels of disability were nearly eight times more likely to seek care than patients with lower levels of disability.
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
Revisiting the Behavioral Model and Access to Medical Care: Does it Matter?
Andersen, R. M. (1995) · Journal of Health and Social Behavior · doi:10.2307/2137284 · Cited by 9,831
Cited by
Maher, C., Underwood, M., & Buchbinder, R. (2017) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(16)30970-9 · Cited by 2,535
Self-citationFear-Avoidance Model of Chronic Pain: The Next Generation
Crombez, G., Eccleston, C., Van Damme, S., Vlaeyen, J. W. S., & Karoly, P. (2012) · The Clinical Journal of Pain · doi:10.1097/ajp.0b013e3182385392 · Cited by 960
Epidemiology of Low Back Pain in Adults
Manchikanti, L., Singh, V., Falco, F. J. E., Benyamin, R. M., & Hirsch, J. A. (2014) · Neuromodulation: Technology at the Neural Interface · doi:10.1111/ner.12018 · Cited by 632
Primary care management of non-specific low back pain: key messages from recent clinical guidelines
Almeida, M., Saragiotto, B., Richards, B., & Maher, C. G. (2018) · Medical Journal of Australia · doi:10.5694/mja17.01152 · Cited by 174
Self-citationSwain, C. T. V., Pan, F., Owen, P. J., Schmidt, H., & Belavy, D. L. (2020) · Journal of Biomechanics · doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2019.08.006 · Cited by 136
Metadata
- Authors
- Ferreira, M. L., Machado, G., Latimer, J., Maher, C., Ferreira, P. H., & Smeets, R. J.
- Venue
- European Journal of Pain
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2010-08
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 747.e1-7
- ISSN
- 1090-3801 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-2149
- OpenAlex
- W2131448132
- Cited by
- 272
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 2.77
- 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: Factors defining care‐seeking in low back pain – A meta‐analysis of population based surveys. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.ejpain.2009.11.005
- The paper
- Ferreira, M. L., Machado, G., Latimer, J., Maher, C., Ferreira, P. H., & Smeets, R. J. (2010). Factors defining care‐seeking in low back pain – A meta‐analysis of population based surveys. European Journal of Pain. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpain.2009.11.005
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.