INT198843

From wiki-pain
Jump to: navigation, search
Context Info
Confidence 0.19
First Reported 2006
Last Reported 2010
Negated 2
Speculated 3
Reported most in Body
Documents 8
Total Number 10
Disease Relevance 9.43
Pain Relevance 9.51

This is a graph with borders and nodes. Maybe there is an Imagemap used so the nodes may be linking to some Pages.

Anatomy Mention Frequency
leg 2
spinal 1
LBP (Ailuropoda melanoleuca)
Pain Term Frequency Confidence Heat
backache 621 100.00 Very High Very High Very High
complementary and alternative medicine 112 99.62 Very High Very High Very High
Pain 295 97.72 Very High Very High Very High
Lasting pain 2 94.96 High High
Acupuncture 32 91.36 High High
imagery 9 86.56 High High
Morphine 1 86.36 High High
Inflammation 8 74.96 Quite High
Pain scale 9 74.64 Quite High
depression 16 47.40 Quite Low
Disease Term Frequency Confidence Heat
Low Back Pain 633 100.00 Very High Very High Very High
Pain 298 97.72 Very High Very High Very High
Metastasis 3 77.16 Quite High
Neurological Disease 3 76.28 Quite High
INFLAMMATION 9 74.96 Quite High
Lordosis 12 70.72 Quite High
Injury 18 50.00 Quite Low
Disease 21 49.84 Quite Low
Neck Pain 2 48.24 Quite Low
Depression 16 47.40 Quite Low

Sentences Mentioned In

Key: Protein Mutation Event Anatomy Negation Speculation Pain term Disease term
While the multi-dimensional problem of LBP has been studied extensively in industrialized countries [5], an understanding of how culture affects LBP is still needed in many developing countries.
Regulation (affects) of LBP associated with backache
1) Confidence 0.19 Published 2010 Journal BMC Musculoskelet Disord Section Body Doc Link PMC2903506 Disease Relevance 0.28 Pain Relevance 0.28
Only total lumbar sagittal extension motion differed between LBP and control subjects, possibly suggesting spinal range of motion may not be important in LBP in this population.
Neg (not) Spec (may) Regulation (important) of LBP in spinal associated with backache
2) Confidence 0.11 Published 2008 Journal BMC Musculoskelet Disord Section Body Doc Link PMC2605454 Disease Relevance 1.47 Pain Relevance 1.22
Treatment preference: to assess whether patient treatment preferences had an influence on LBP outcomes, patients were asked, before randomisation, which intervention they would prefer being allocated to.


Spec (whether) Regulation (influence) of LBP associated with backache
3) Confidence 0.10 Published 2010 Journal BMC Musculoskelet Disord Section Body Doc Link PMC2954985 Disease Relevance 0.34 Pain Relevance 0.43
To investigate the influence of LBP, subjects were divided into three LBP categories; No LBP, Minor LBP and Significant LBP.
Spec (investigate) Regulation (influence) of LBP associated with backache
4) Confidence 0.08 Published 2008 Journal BMC Musculoskelet Disord Section Body Doc Link PMC2605454 Disease Relevance 2.05 Pain Relevance 1.86
Considering the multifactorial influences of LBP [24], and variance in prevalence based on LBP definition [25], Significant LBP group allocation was defined by a combination of indicators across a range of domains based on previous LBP research.
Regulation (influences) of LBP associated with backache
5) Confidence 0.07 Published 2008 Journal BMC Musculoskelet Disord Section Body Doc Link PMC2605454 Disease Relevance 2.23 Pain Relevance 2.05
While half (56%) of the GPs said the guideline changed their practice of managing LBP, 83% claimed that they already treated patients according to the guideline.
Regulation (changed) of LBP associated with backache
6) Confidence 0.04 Published 2008 Journal Implement Sci Section Body Doc Link PMC2275295 Disease Relevance 0.15 Pain Relevance 0.15
Other health care professionals such as naturopathic healers ["Heilpraktiker"] also offer CAM, but are not very popular for LBP [11].
Neg (not) Regulation (popular) of LBP associated with complementary and alternative medicine and backache
7) Confidence 0.02 Published 2007 Journal BMC Complement Altern Med Section Body Doc Link PMC2222227 Disease Relevance 0.21 Pain Relevance 0.75
The RMQ showed superior discriminative abilities in LBP only patients (both PrS and SeS) whereas the ODI was marginally superior in the leg pain patients, again these differences were not statistically significant.
Regulation (abilities) of LBP in leg associated with pain and backache
8) Confidence 0.02 Published 2006 Journal BMC Musculoskelet Disord Section Body Doc Link PMC1635558 Disease Relevance 1.02 Pain Relevance 1.02
It is now considered effective for chronic LBP [25,26].
Regulation (effective) of LBP associated with backache
9) Confidence 0.02 Published 2007 Journal BMC Complement Altern Med Section Body Doc Link PMC2222227 Disease Relevance 0.57 Pain Relevance 0.64
RMQ is suitable for measuring change in LBP only patients and both ODI and RMQ are suitable for leg pain patients irrespectively of patient entry point.
Regulation (change) of LBP in leg associated with pain and backache
10) Confidence 0.01 Published 2006 Journal BMC Musculoskelet Disord Section Abstract Doc Link PMC1635558 Disease Relevance 1.09 Pain Relevance 1.09

General Comments

This test has worked.

Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Toolbox