A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1075
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3195
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Development, internal and external validation of a prognostic model for symptom dissatisfaction among older adults with a new episode of back pain. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Objectives: The objective was to develop, internally and externally validate a prognostic model for symptom dissatisfaction, assessed by the patient acceptable symptom state (PASS), for older adults (≥55 years) seeking primary care for a new episode of back pain.

Design: Development, internal and external validation of a prognostic model using data from two prospective cohort studies with a 1-year follow-up was conducted.

Participants And Setting: The Norwegian cohort (n=452) was used for model development and internal validation. External validation was conducted using the Dutch cohort (n=675).

Outcome Measures And Method: The outcome was defined as symptom dissatisfaction based on the PASS at 12 months follow-up. A logistic regression model was developed using backward selection and internally validated using 200 bootstrap samples. External validation included recalibration of the model intercept and slope. Model performance was measured using Nagelkerke-R, area under the curve (AUC) and calibration slope, calibration in-the-large (CITL) and calibration plots.

Results: At 12 months, ~55% reported dissatisfaction in both cohorts. The final model included disability, catastrophising, recent back pain episode, spinal rotation pain, baseline symptom satisfaction, symptom duration and recovery expectation as predictors. The internally validated model showed acceptable discrimination (AUC 0.75, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.78), R was 0.23, the calibration slope and CITL being 0.89 (95% CI 0.73 to 1.08) and 0.01 (95% CI -0.16 to 0.15), respectively. External validation performance after recalibration yielded AUC 0.68 (95% CI 0.65 to 0.70), slope 0.86 (95% CI 0.67 to 1.05) and CITL 0.08 (95% CI -0.01 to 0.16).

Conclusions: This prognostic model could be a useful tool for predicting PASS outcomes among older adults with back pain. The external validation results imply that more research is needed to optimise predictions.

Trial Registration Number: NCT04261309.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12410640PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2025-102318DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

external validation
24
prognostic model
16
development internal
12
symptom dissatisfaction
12
older adults
12
model
10
internal external
8
validation prognostic
8
model symptom
8
internally validated
8

Similar Publications