Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 175

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 access
Endean, Alison, Palmer, Keith T., Coggon, David·2011·Spine

Abstract

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/brs.0b013e3181cd9adb

Cites

2 of 2 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 2 references

Cited by

  • Low back pain

    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

See all 175

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.