The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Prognostic factors of whiplash-associated disorders: a systematic review of prospective cohort studies
Abstract
We present a systematic review of prospective cohort studies. Our aim was to assess prognostic factors associated with functional recovery of patients with whiplash injuries. The failure of some patients to recover following whiplash injury has been linked to a number of prognostic factors. However, there is some inconsistency in the literature and there have been no systematic attempts to analyze the level of evidence for prognostic factors in whiplash recovery. Studies were selected for inclusion following a comprehensive search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, the database of the Dutch Institute of Allied Health Professions up until April 2002 and hand searches of the reference lists of retrieved articles. Studies were selected if the objective was to assess prognostic factors associated with recovery; the design was a prospective cohort study; the study population included at least an identifiable subgroup of patients suffering from a whiplash injury; and the paper was a full report published in English, German, French or Dutch. The methodological quality was independently assessed by two reviewers. A study was considered to be of 'high quality' if it satisfied at least 50% of the maximum available quality score. Two independent reviewers extracted data and the association between prognostic factors and functional recovery was calculated in terms of risk estimates. Fifty papers reporting on twenty-nine cohorts were included in the review. Twelve cohorts were considered to be of 'high quality'. Because of the heterogeneity of patient selection, type of prognostic factors and outcome measures, no statistical pooling was able to be performed. Strong evidence was found for high initial pain intensity being an adverse prognostic factor. There was strong evidence that for older age, female gender, high acute psychological response, angular deformity of the neck, rear-end collision, and compensation not being associated with an adverse prognosis. Several physical (e.g. restricted range of motion, high number of complaints), psychosocial (previous psychological problems), neuropsychosocial factors (nervousness), crash related (e.g. accident on highway) and treatment related factors (need to resume physiotherapy) showed limited prognostic value for functional recovery. High initial pain intensity is an important predictor for delayed functional recovery for patients with whiplash injury. Often mentioned factors like age, gender and compensation do not seem to be of prognostic value. Scientific information about prognostic factors can guide physicians or other care providers to direct treatment and to probably prevent chronicity.
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
Moher, D., Schulz, K. F., & Altman, D. G. (2001) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(00)04337-3 · Cited by 5,373
Publication bias in clinical research
Easterbrook, P. J., Gopalan, R., Berlin, J. A., & Matthews, D. R. (1991) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/0140-6736(91)90201-y · Cited by 3,109 · cited 1×
“Studies with significant results are more likely to lead to multiple publications, and their identification may be more likely (Easterbrook et al., 1991).”
BackgroundPsychiatric consequences of road traffic accidents
Mayou, R., Bryant, B., & Duthie, R. (1993) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.307.6905.647 · Cited by 626
Cited by
The biopsychosocial approach to chronic pain: Scientific advances and future directions.
Gatchel, R. J., Peng, Y. B., Peters, M. L., Fuchs, P. N., & Turk, D. C. (2007) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.133.4.581 · Cited by 3,392
Evaluation of the Quality of Prognosis Studies in Systematic Reviews
Hayden, J. A., Côté, P., & Bombardier, C. (2006) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-144-6-200603210-00010 · Cited by 1,452
Quality of life among long-term breast cancer survivors: A systematic review
Mols, F., Vingerhoets, A. J. J. M., Coebergh, J. W., & van de Poll-Franse, L. V. (2005) · European Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2005.05.017 · Cited by 585
Prognostic factors for musculoskeletal pain in primary care: a systematic review.
(2007) · PubMed Central · Cited by 349
Epidemiology of Chronic Pain with Psychological Comorbidity: Prevalence, Risk, Course, and Prognosis
Tunks, E. R., Crook, J., & Weir, R. (2008) · The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1177/070674370805300403 · Cited by 323
Metadata
- Authors
- 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.
- Venue
- Pain
- Published
- 2003-07
- Volume
- 104
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 303-322
- ISSN
- 0304-3959 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2019737701
- Cited by
- 430
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 3.48
- 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: Prognostic factors of whiplash-associated disorders: a systematic review of prospective cohort studies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0304-3959(03)00050-2
- The paper
- 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). Prognostic factors of whiplash-associated disorders: a systematic review of prospective cohort studies. Pain. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0304-3959(03)00050-2
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.