Comparing the STarT back screening tool's subgroup allocation of individual patients with that of independent clinical experts
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The STarT Back Screening Tool (SBST) is validated to subgroup primary care patients with back pain into risk groups relevant to initial decision-making. However, it remains unclear how the tool's allocation of individuals compares with subjective clinical decision-making. We evaluated agreement between clinicians and the SBST's allocation to risk subgroups, and explored reasons for differences observed. METHODS: Twelve primary care back pain patients underwent a video-recorded clinical assessment. The SBST was completed on the same day. Clinical experts (3 general practitioners, 3 physiotherapists, and 3 pain management specialists) individually reviewed the patient videos (4 each), blind to SBST allocation. Their task was to subgroup patients into low, medium, or high-risk groups. RESULTS: Interrater agreement between clinicians was "fair" (κ=0.28), with consistent allocation between experts in 4 of 12 patients. There was observed agreement with the SBST in 17 of 36 cases (47%) and Cohen's weighted κ was 0.22, indicating fair agreement. Two reasons for differences emerged. Clinicians tailor their decisions according to patient expectations and demands for treatment and clinicians use knowledge of difficult life circumstances that may be unrelated back pain. DISCUSSION: Clinicians make inconsistent risk estimations for primary care patients with back pain when using intuition alone, with little agreement with a formal subgrouping tool. Unlike clinicians, the SBST could not make a sophisticated synthesis of patient preferences, expectations, and previous treatment history. Although acknowledging the limitations of back pain subgrouping tools, more research is needed to test whether their use improves consistency in primary care decision-making.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Recent work, such as the STarT Back project, has made important advances in prognostic stratification of patients with chronic low back pain.
“Recent work such as the STarT Back project from the U.K. has made important advances in this regard,57–60”
From Report of the NIH Task Force on research standards for chronic low back pain. (2014) · cites this paper as [59]
Cites
The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2529310 · Cited by 81,148 · see citing works
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 · see citing works
Utility of a new procedure for diagnosing mental disorders in primary care. The PRIME-MD 1000 study
Spitzer, R. L. (1994) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.272.22.1749 · Cited by 2,648 · see citing works
Utility of a New Procedure for Diagnosing Mental Disorders in Primary Care: The PRIME-MD 1000 Study
Spitzer, R. L. (1994) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.1994.03520220043029 · Cited by 1,873 · see citing works
Chapter 3 European guidelines for the management of acute nonspecific low back pain in primary care
van Tulder, M., Becker, A., Bekkering, T., Breen, A., del Real, M. T. G., Hutchinson, A., Koes, B., Laerum, E., Malmivaara, A., & On behalf of the COST B13 Working Group on Guidelines for the Management of Acute Low Back Pain in Primary Care (2006) · European Spine Journal · doi:10.1007/s00586-006-1071-2 · Cited by 1,258 · see citing works
A primary care back pain screening tool: identifying patient subgroups for initial treatment
Hill, J. C., Dunn, K. M., Lewis, M., Mullis, R., Main, C. J., Foster, N. E., & Hay, E. M. (2008) · Arthritis Care & Research · doi:10.1002/art.23563 · Cited by 1,052 · see citing works
Self-citationLinton, S. J., & HALLDÉN, K. (1998) · Clinical Journal of Pain · doi:10.1097/00002508-199809000-00007 · Cited by 627 · see citing works
Linton, S. J., & Boersma, K. (2003) · The Clinical Journal of Pain · doi:10.1097/00002508-200303000-00002 · Cited by 523 · see citing works
Hill, J. C., Dunn, K. M., Main, C. J., & Hay, E. M. (2010) · European Journal of Pain · doi:10.1016/j.ejpain.2009.01.003 · Cited by 207 · see citing works
Self-citationScreening for Symptoms of Depression by Physical Therapists Managing Low Back Pain
Haggman, S., Maher, C. G., & Refshauge, K. M. (2004) · Physical Therapy · doi:10.1093/ptj/84.12.1157 · Cited by 142 · see citing works
Hay, E. M., Dunn, K. M., Hill, J. C., Lewis, M., Mason, E. E., Konstantinou, K., Sowden, G., Somerville, S., Vohora, K., Whitehurst, D. G. T., et al. (2008) · BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders · doi:10.1186/1471-2474-9-58 · Cited by 123 · see citing works
Self-citationDenison, E., Åsenlöf, P., Sandborgh, M., & Lindberg, P. (2006) · Journal of Pain · doi:10.1016/j.jpain.2006.06.007 · Cited by 106 · see citing works
Jellema, P., van der Windt, D., van der Horst, H. E., Stalman, W. A. B., & Bouter, L. M. (2007) · PubMed Central · Cited by 77 · see citing works
GP attitudes and self-reported behaviour in primary care consultations for low back pain
Corbett, M., Foster, N. E., & Ong, B. N. (2009) · Family Practice · doi:10.1093/fampra/cmp042 · Cited by 77 · see citing works
Dunn, K. M., Jordan, K. P., & Croft, P. R. (2009) · Primary Health Care Research & Development · doi:10.1017/s1463423609990296 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
Self-citationWall, P. D. (1999) · Physiotherapy · doi:10.1016/s0031-9406(05)66131-7 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
Comparing clinical and lay accounts of the diagnosis and treatment of back pain
Ong, B. N., & Hooper, H. (2006) · Sociology of Health & Illness · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9566.2006.00488.x · Cited by 33 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Hill, J. C., Whitehurst, D. G., Lewis, M., Bryan, S., Dunn, K. M., Foster, N. E., Konstantinou, K., Main, C. J., Mason, E., Somerville, S., et al. (2011) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(11)60937-9 · Cited by 1,306 · see citing works
Self-citationEhde, D. M., Dillworth, T. M., & Turner, J. A. (2014) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/a0035747 · Cited by 879 · see citing works
Report of the NIH Task Force on research standards for chronic low back pain.
Deyo, R. A., Dworkin, S. F., Amtmann, D., Andersson, G., Borenstein, D., Carragee, E., Carrino, J., Chou, R., Cook, K., DeLitto, A., et al. (2014) · The Journal of Pain · doi:10.1016/j.jpain.2014.03.005 · Cited by 533 · see citing works
Bruyère, O., Demoulin, M., Brereton, C., Humblet, F., Flynn, D., Hill, J. C., Maquet, D., Van Beveren, J., Reginster, J.-Y., Crielaard, J.-M., et al. (2012) · Archives of Public Health · doi:10.1186/0778-7367-70-12 · Cited by 69 · see citing works
Self-citationZimney, K., Louw, A., & Puentedura, E. J. (2014) · Physiotherapy Theory and Practice · doi:10.3109/09593985.2013.856508 · Cited by 68 · see citing works
Field, J., & Newell, D. (2012) · Chiropractic & Manual Therapies · doi:10.1186/2045-709x-20-17 · Cited by 61 · see citing works
- Authors
- Hill, J. C., Vohora, K., Dunn, K. M., Main, C. J., & Hay, E. M.
- Affiliations
- Arthritis Research UK (GB)
- Venue
- The Clinical Journal of Pain
- Published
- 2010-11
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 783-787
- ISSN
- 0749-8047 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2022894533
- Cited by
- 88
- References
- 17
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 8
- FWCI
- 4.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Clinical Journal of Pain (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute for Health and Care Research (RP-PG-0707-10131)
- Keele University
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Reliability and Agreement in Measurement
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Medical Practices and Rehabilitation
- Keywords
- STarT Back Screening Tool, back pain, risk stratification, clinical decision-making, clinician agreement, primary care, inter-rater reliability, clinical intuition, patient expectations, patient preferences
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Decision Making, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Primary Health Care, Surveys and Questionnaires, Observer Variation, Low Back Pain, Risk Assessment
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
