Cited by 15Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsDigital Mental Health Interventions

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 97 of the 99 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Long-Term Clinical Outcomes of a Remote Digital Musculoskeletal Program: An Ad Hoc Analysis from a Longitudinal Study with a Non-Participant Comparison Group

Open access

Abstract

Digital solutions have emerged as an alternative to conventional physiotherapy, particularly for chronic musculoskeletal pain (CMP) management; however, its long-term effects remain largely unexplored. This study focuses on patients reporting CMP, assessing 1-year clinical outcomes after a multimodal digital care program (DCP) versus non-participants, who enrolled in the program but never engaged in a single exercise session or partook of the educational content made available to them. In this longitudinal study ad-hoc analysis, pain and functionality outcomes at 1-year reassessment were studied, focusing on the odds of reaching minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and, overall average reduction in both outcomes. Healthcare utilization was additionally studied within the same period. From 867 individuals allocated to the study, 460 completed the 1-year reassessment (intervention group: 310; comparison group: 150). The intervention group presented sustained and greater pain reduction until 1-year reassessment than the comparison group, reflecting greater odds ratio of achieving the MCID both in pain and functionality (1.90 95% CI: 1.27–2.86, p = 0.002 and 2.02 95% CI: 1.31–3.12, p = 0.001, respectively). A lower healthcare utilization during the 1-year follow-up was observed in the intervention group than in the comparison group. This study suggests that a digital CMP program may have a lasting impact on improved pain and functionality in patients with CMP.

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 · 10.3390/healthcare10122349

Cites

97 of 97 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

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?

  • Digital rehabilitation is effective among several musculoskeletal conditions regardless of race/ethnicity and socioeconomic backgrounds.

    “Previous research supports its effectiveness among several musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions [16-18] regardless of race/ethnicity [19] and socioeconomic backgrounds [20].”

    From Exploring the Importance of Race and Gender Concordance Between Patients and Physical Therapists in Digital Rehabilitation for Musculoskeletal Conditions: Observational, Longitudinal Study (2024) · cites this paper as [17]

    Citation [20] is attached to the claim that effectiveness holds regardless of socioeconomic background. The Methods (§2.8) list employment status among baseline demographics, and the Results (§3.2) describe employment, but neither reports outcomes by socioeconomic background. Searches for socioeconomic status, income, and education found no passage establishing that qualifier. (LLM, conf=0.74)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 99 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Areias, A. C., Costa, F., Janela, D., Molinos, M., Moulder, R. G., Lains, J., Scheer, J. K., Bento, V., Yanamadala, V., & Correia, F. D.
Affiliations
  • Sword Health Inc., Draper, UT 84043, USA
  • Institute for Cognitive Science, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO 80309, USA
  • Rovisco Pais Medical and Rehabilitation Centre, 3064-908 Tocha, Portugal
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • Quinnipiac University (US)
Corresponding author
Correia, Fernando Dias
Venue
Healthcare
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2022-11-23
Volume
10
Issue
12
Pages
2349
ISSN
2227-9032 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4309728731
Cited by
15
References
99
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3
FWCI
1.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Healthcare (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
Keywords
chronic musculoskeletal pain, remote physiotherapy, exercise intervention, analgesia, functional capacity, minimal clinically important difference, health care utilization, long-term outcomes

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