Low-back pain definitions in occupational studies were categorized for a meta-analysis using Delphi consensus methods

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 60, Issue 6, 2007, Pages 625.e1-625.e23

  Griffith, Lauren E ^a,b   Hogg Johnson, Sheilah ^b,c   Cole, Donald C ^b,c   Krause, Niklas ^d   Hayden, Jill ^c   Burdorf, Alex ^e   Leclerc, Annette ^f   Coggon, David ^g   Bongers, Paulien ^h   Walter, Stephen D ^a   Shannon, Harry S ^a,c  

^a MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^c INSTITUTE FOR WORK AND HEALTH   (Canada)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^e ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^f INSERM   (France)

^g UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON   (United Kingdom)

^h TNO   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Classification; Consensus; Delphi technique; Low back pain; Meta analysis; Outcomes assessment

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONSENSUS; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; E-MAIL; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; LOW BACK PAIN; MEDICAL CARE; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; META ANALYSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SYMPTOMATOLOGY; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW;

EID: 34247562222     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.09.005     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Nachemson A., Waddell G., and Norlund A. Epidemiology of neck and back pain. In: Nachemson A., and Honsson E. (Eds). Neck and Back Pain: The Scientific Evidence of Causes, Diagnosis and Treatment (2000), Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, Philadelphia 165-188
2. Frank J.W., Pulcins I.R., Kerr M.S., Shannon H.S., and Stansfeld S.A. Occupational back pain-an unhelpful polemic. Scand J Work Environ Health 21 (1995) 3-14
3. Manek N.J., and MacGregor A.J. Epidemiology of back disorders: prevalence, risk factors, and prognosis. Curr Opin Rheumatol 17 (2005) 134-140
4. Scientific approach of the assessment and management of activity-related spinal disorders. A monograph for clinicians. Report of the Quebec Task Force on Spinal Disorders. Spine 12 7 Suppl (1987) S1-S59
5. Krause N., and Ragland D.R. Occupational disability due to low back pain: a new interdisciplinary classification based on a phase model of disability. Spine 19 (1994) 1011-1020
6. Deyo R.A., Battie M., Beurskens A.J., Bombardier C., Croft P., Koes B., et al. Outcome measures for low back pain research. A proposal for standardized use. Spine 23 (1998) 2003-2013
7. de Vet H.C., Heymans M.W., Dunn K.M., Pope D.P., van der Beek A.J., Macfarlane G.J., et al. Episodes of low back pain: a proposal for uniform definitions to be used in research. Spine 27 (2002) 2409-2416
8. Glasziou P.P., and Sanders S.L. Investigating causes of heterogeneity in systematic reviews. Stat Med 21 (2002) 1503-1511
9. Stroup D.F., Berlin J.A., Morton S.C., Olkin I., Williamson G.D., Rennie D., et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA 283 (2000) 2008-2012
10. Ozguler A., Leclerc A., Landre M.F., Pietri-Taleb F., and Niedhammer I. Individual and occupational determinants of low back pain according to various definitions of low back pain. J Epidemiol Community Health 54 (2000) 215-220
11. Leboeuf-Yde C., Lauritsen J.M., and Lauritzen T. Why has the search for causes of low back pain largely been nonconclusive?. Spine 22 (1997) 877-881
12. van Tulder M., Furlan A., Bombardier C., Bouter L., and Editorial Board of the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group. Updated method guidelines for systematic reviews in the cochrane collaboration back review group. Spine 28 (2003) 1290-1299
13. Van Eerd D., Beaton D., Cole D., Lucas J., Hogg-Johnson S., and Bombardier C. Classification systems for upper-limb musculoskeletal disorders in workers: a review of the literature. J Clin Epidemiol 56 (2003) 925-936
14. Fink A., Kosecoff J., Chassin M., and Brook R.H. Consensus methods: characteristics and guidelines for use. Am J Public Health 74 (1984) 979-983
15. Van der Bruggen H., and Groen M. Toward an unequivocal definition and classification of patient outcomes. Nurs Diagn 10 (1999) 93-102
16. Weigl M., Cieza A., Andersen C., Kolleritis B., Amann E., and Stucki G. Identification of relevant ICF categories in patients with chronic health conditions: a Delphi exercise. J Rehabil Med Suppl 44 (2004) 12-21
17. Nathens A.B., Rivara F.P., Jurkovich G.J., Maier R.V., Johansen J.M., and Thompson D.C. Management of the injured patient: identification of research topics for systematic review using the Delphi technique. Journal of Trauma-Injury Infection & Critical Care 54 (2003) 595-601
18. Boutron I., Moher D., Tugwell P., Giraudeau B., Poiraudeau S., Nizard R., et al. A checklist to evaluate a report of a nonpharmacological trial (CLEAR NPT) was developed using consensus. J Clin Epidemiol 58 (2005) 1233-1240
19. Washington D.L., Bernstein S.J., Kahan J.P., Leape L.L., Kamberg C.J., and Shekelle P.G. Reliability of clinical guideline development using mail-only versus in-person expert panels. Med Care 41 (2003) 1374-1381
20. Hasson F., Keeney S., and McKenna H. Research guidelines for the Delphi survey technique. J Adv Nurs 32 (2000) 1008-1015
21. Beaton D.E., Cole D.C., Manno M., Bombardier C., Hogg-Johnson S., and Shannon H.S. Describing the burden of upper-extremity musculoskeletal disorders in newspaper workers: what difference do case definitions make?. J Occup Rehabil 10 (2000) 39-53
22. Wilson I.B., and Cleary P.D. Linking clinical variables with health-related quality of life. A conceptual model of patient outcomes. JAMA 273 (1995) 59-65
23. Verbrugge L.M., and Jette A.M. The disablement process. Soc Sci Med 38 (1994) 1-14
24. Cieza A., Stucki G., Weigl M., Disler P., Jackel W., van der Linden S., et al. ICF Core Sets for low back pain. J Rehabil Med Suppl 44 (2004) 69-74
25. SAS/STAT User's Guide [computer program]. Version 8 (2003), SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC
26. Grant J.S., and Kinney M.R. Using the Delphi technique to examine the content validity of nursing diagnoses. Nurs Diagn 3 (1992) 12-22
27. Heeren T., and D'Agostino R. Robustness of the two independent samples t-test when applied to ordinal scaled data. Stat Med 6 (1987) 79-90
28. Armstrong G.D. Parametric statistics and ordinal data: a pervasive misconception. Nurs Res 30 (1981) 60-62
29. Cohen M.E. Analysis of ordinal dental data: evaluation of conflicting recommendations. J Dent Res 80 (2001) 309-313
30. Rowe G., Wright G., and Bolger F. Delphi: a reevaluation of research and theory. Technol Forecast Soc Change 39 (1991) 235-251
31. Elders L.A.M., and Burdorf A. Prevalence, incidence, and recurrence of low back pain in scaffolders during a 3-year follow-up study. Spine 29 (2004) E101-E106
32. Smedley J., Egger P., Cooper C., and Coggon D. Prospective cohort study of predictors of incident low back pain in nurses. BMJ 314 (1997) 1225-1228
33. Higgins JPT, Green S, editors. When not to use meta-analysis in a review. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions 8.1.2 [updated May 2005]; Section 8. In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 3, 2005. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.