Clinical examination findings as prognostic factors in low back pain: a systematic review of the literature

doi:10.1186/s12998-015-0054-y

PMC full text:

Chiropr Man Therap. 2015; 23: 13.

Published online 2015 Mar 23. doi: 10.1186/s12998-015-0054-y

Copyright/License ►Request permission to reuse: Copyright © Hartvigsen et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2015
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Table 1

Overview of quality domains

Domains of potential bias	Question	Data extraction items
Study participation	The study sample represents the population of interest on key characteristics, sufficient to limit potential bias of the extracted results	Source population clearly defined. Study population described (inclusion and exclusion criteria). Study population represents population of interest.
Study attrition	Loss to follow-up (from target population to final study sample) is not associated with key characteristics (i.e. the study sample adequately represents the population of interest). This is sufficient to limit bias of the extracted results.	Completeness and transparency of follow-up described for each relevant point of follow-up. Completeness of follow-up adequate. Reasons for loss to follow-up are adequately described for key characteristics.There are no important differences between key characteristics and outcomes in participants who completed the study and those who did not.
Prognostic factor measurement	The prognostic factors of interest are adequately measured in study participants to sufficiently limit bias of the extracted results	Prognostic tests are defined well enough to be replicated. The performance of the prognostic tests are standardized appropriately.
Outcome measurement	The outcome of interest is adequately measured in study participants to sufficiently limit bias of the extracted results.	Outcomes are defined. Outcome measures are well established. Method, setting and time of outcome measurements are the same for all participants.
Analysis & reporting	The statistical analysis and reporting of results is transparent and appropriate in relation to the study, limiting potential for presentation of invalid results	There is sufficient presentation of data to assess the adequacy of the analysis.The statistical analysis is sufficiently described and appears appropriate in relation to the part of the study that concerns the present review. There is no selective reporting of results.

Modified from Hayden, 2006 [22].