The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Potential of Magnetic Resonance Imaging Findings to Refine Case Definition for Mechanical Low Back Pain in Epidemiological Studies: A Systematic Review
Open accessAbstract
STUDY DESIGN: systematic review and meta-analysis. OBJECTIVE: to assess how confidently low back pain (LBP) can be attributed to abnormalities on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and thereby explore the potential value of MRI abnormalities in refining case definition for mechanical LBP in epidemiological research. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: most epidemiological studies of mechanical LBP have defined cases only by reported symptoms, but it is possible that the potency of causes differs depending on whether there is demonstrable underlying spinal pathology. METHODS: we reviewed the published data on MRI abnormalities, looking for data on the repeatability of their assessment, their prevalence in people free from LBP, and their association with LBP. Where data were sufficient, we calculated a summary estimate of prevalence in people without LBP and a meta-estimate of the odds ratio for the association with LBP. A formula was then applied to estimate the corresponding prevalence rate ratio, assuming 3 possible prevalence rates for LBP in the general population. RESULTS: data were most extensive for disc protrusion, nerve root displacement or compression, disc degeneration, and high intensity zone, all of which could be assessed repeatedly. All were associated with LBP, meta-estimates of odds ratios ranging from 2.3 (nerve root displacement or compression) to 3.6 (disc protrusion). However, even for disc protrusion, estimates of the corresponding prevalence rate ratios were mostly less than 2. CONCLUSION: MRI findings of disc protrusion, nerve root displacement or compression, disc degeneration, and high intensity zone are all associated with LBP, but individually, none of these abnormalities provides a strong indication that LBP is attributable to underlying pathology. This limits their value in refining epidemiological case definitions for LBP.
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
A review of psychological risk factors in back and neck pain
Linton, S. J. (2000) · Spine · doi:10.1097/00007632-200005010-00017 · Cited by 1,776 · cited 1×
“Savage et al, 19977 149 volunteers from 5 occupations, including 79 with LBP in past year and 70 without such pain Compression 5 (6) 74 (94) 2 (3) 69 (97) 2.”
BackgroundPincus, T., Burton, A. K., Vogel, S., & Field, A. P. (2002) · Spine · doi:10.1097/00007632-200203010-00017 · Cited by 1,633
Cited by
Vlaeyen, J. W. S., Maher, C. G., Wiech, K., Van Zundert, J., Meloto, C. B., Diatchenko, L., Battié, M. C., Goossens, M., Koes, B., & Linton, S. J. (2018) · Nature Reviews Disease Primers · doi:10.1038/s41572-018-0052-1 · Cited by 497
Metadata
- Authors
- Endean, A., Palmer, K. T., & Coggon, D.
- Venue
- Spine
- Published
- 2011-01
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 160-169
- ISSN
- 0362-2436 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2046270670
- Cited by
- 175
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 8.20
- 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: Potential of Magnetic Resonance Imaging Findings to Refine Case Definition for Mechanical Low Back Pain in Epidemiological Studies: A Systematic Review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/brs.0b013e3181cd9adb
- The paper
- Endean, A., Palmer, K. T., & Coggon, D. (2011). Potential of Magnetic Resonance Imaging Findings to Refine Case Definition for Mechanical Low Back Pain in Epidemiological Studies: A Systematic Review. Spine. https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0b013e3181cd9adb
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.