Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 915

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 51 of the 51 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Systematic Review of Psychosocial Factors at Work and Private Life as Risk Factors for Back Pain

Open access
Hoogendoorn, Wilhelmina E., van Poppel, Mireille N. M., Bongers, Paulien M., Koes, Bart W., Bouter, Lex M.·2000·Spine

Abstract

STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review of observational studies. OBJECTIVES: To assess whether psychosocial factors at work and in private life are risk factors for the occurrence of back pain. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Several reviews on risk factors for back pain have paid attention to psychosocial factors. However, in none of the published reviews was a strict systematic approach used to identify and summarize the available evidence. METHODS: A computerized bibliographical search of several databases was performed, restricted to studies with a cohort or case-control design. A rating system was used to assess the strength of the evidence for various factors, based on the methodologic quality of the studies and the consistency of the findings. RESULTS: Eleven cohort and two case-control studies were included in this review. Strong evidence was found for low social support in the workplace and low job satisfaction as risk factors for back pain. Insufficient evidence was found for an effect of a high work pace, high qualitative demands, low job content, low job control, and psychosocial factors in private life. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence was found for an effect of low workplace social support and low job satisfaction. However, the result for workplace social support was sensitive to slight changes in the rating system, and the effect found for low job satisfaction may be a result of insufficient adjustment for psychosocial work characteristics and physical load at work. In addition, the combined evaluation of job content and job control, both aspects of decision latitude, led to strong evidence of a role for low job decision latitude. Thus, based on this review, there is evidence for an effect of work-related psychosocial factors, but the evidence for the role of specific factors has not been established yet.

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 · 10.1097/00007632-200008150-00017

Cites

51 of 51 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

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

Show all 51 references

Cited by

See all 915

Metadata

Authors
Hoogendoorn, W. E., van Poppel, M. N. M., Bongers, P. M., Koes, B. W., & Bouter, L. M.
Venue
Spine
Published
2000-08
Volume
25
Issue
16
Pages
2114-2125
ISSN
0362-2436 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2019059550
Cited by
915
References
51
FWCI
2.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Systematic Review of Psychosocial Factors at Work and Private Life as Risk Factors for Back Pain. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/00007632-200008150-00017
The paper
Hoogendoorn, W. E., van Poppel, M. N. M., Bongers, P. M., Koes, B. W., & Bouter, L. M. (2000). Systematic Review of Psychosocial Factors at Work and Private Life as Risk Factors for Back Pain. Spine. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200008150-00017

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.