The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Back Pain Prevalence and Visit Rates: Estimates From U.S. National Surveys, 2002
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Review and analysis of data from two U.S. national surveys in 2002. OBJECTIVES: To examine the prevalence of back pain and physician visits for back pain in the United States. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: National data on the prevalence of back pain become available only intermittently. METHODS: We summarized published data from the 2002 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) on the prevalence of back pain and compared it with earlier surveys. We also analyzed the 2002 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS) to determine physician visit rates for back pain. RESULTS: In the 2002 NHIS, there were 31,044 adult respondents. Low back pain lasting at least a whole day in the past 3 months was reported by 26.4% of respondents, and neck pain was reported by 13.8%. Among racial groups, American Indians and Alaska Natives had the highest prevalence of low back pain, and Asian Americans had the lowest. Prevalence generally declined with greater levels of education and increasing income. Prevalence estimates were consistent with those from previous surveys, although methodologic differences limited comparisons. NAMCS data suggested that the proportion of all physician visits attributable to low back pain (2.3% in 2002) has changed little since the early 1990s. CONCLUSIONS: About one fourth of U.S. adults report low back pain in the past 3 months; the proportion of physician visits attributed to back pain has changed little in the past decade.
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
Cited by
Chou, R., Qaseem, A., Snow, V., Casey, D., Cross, J. T., Shekelle, P., Owens, D. K., & for the Clinical Efficacy Assessment Subcommittee of the American College of Physicians and the American College of Physicians/American Pain Society Low Back Pain Guidelines Panel* (2007) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-147-7-200710020-00006 · Cited by 2,718
Expenditures and health status among adults with back and neck problems
Martin, B. I. (2008) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.299.6.656 · Cited by 1,531
Self-citationThe Rising Prevalence of Chronic Low Back Pain
Freburger, J. K., Holmes, G. M., Agans, R. P., Jackman, A. M., Darter, J. D., Wallace, A. S., Castel, L. D., Kalsbeek, W. D., & Carey, T. S. (2009) · Archives of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/archinternmed.2008.543 · Cited by 1,507
Knezevic, N. N., Candido, K. D., Vlaeyen, J. W. S., Van Zundert, J., & Cohen, S. P. (2021) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(21)00733-9 · Cited by 1,345
Estimates of Pain Prevalence and Severity in Adults: United States, 2012
Nahin, R. L. (2015) · The Journal of Pain · doi:10.1016/j.jpain.2015.05.002 · Cited by 918
“Almost all chosen adults (8,781) completed the supplement, resulting in a 98% supplement response.”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Deyo, R. A., Mirza, S. K., & Martin, B. I.
- Venue
- Spine
- Published
- 2006-11
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 23
- Pages
- 2724-2727
- ISSN
- 0362-2436 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2067689995
- Cited by
- 985
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 13.21
- 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: Back Pain Prevalence and Visit Rates: Estimates From U.S. National Surveys, 2002. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/01.brs.0000244618.06877.cd
- The paper
- Deyo, R. A., Mirza, S. K., & Martin, B. I. (2006). Back Pain Prevalence and Visit Rates: Estimates From U.S. National Surveys, 2002. Spine. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.brs.0000244618.06877.cd
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.