ArticleScandinavian journal of primary health care2026
Exploring physicians' perspectives on influencing factors of chronic non-specific low back pain: a qualitative study.
Article in Scandinavian journal of primary health care, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to assess physicians' perspective of non-specific chronic low back pain (cLBP), focusing on whether they attribute the condition to single or multiple influencing factors. It also explored how these factors are conceptualised and whether physicians' expressed attributions align with the biopsychosocial approach advised in the guidelines for the management of cLBP.
methodsThis exploratory qualitative study used a clinical vignette depicting cLBP and employed a deductive framework analysis. Licensed general practitioners and trainees were asked to identify contributing factors to the patient's cLBP. Five predefined themes, 'Beliefs', 'Previous experiences', 'Emotions', 'Patients behaviour' and 'Contextual factors', were analysed to assess their framing within a biopsychosocial approach.
resultsSeventy-six physicians participated. They used very brief responses when reporting contributing factors to cLBP (median: 11 words). While 71% identified sedentary behaviour as a contributing factor, only 28% mentioned fear of movement and 8% identified the misbeliefs embedded in the vignette. Half of the participants linked the patient's cLBP to multiple factors, yet 38% of those responses were exempt from segments 'less aligned' with a biopsychosocial approach.
conclusionsPhysicians generally provided a multifactorial perspective on cLBP, yet relevant factors such as identifying misbeliefs were often overlooked. Approximately, three-quarters did not mention fear of movement, despite evidence supporting this link. Physicians need to be aware of how their perspective can shape potentially harmful or stigmatizing messages, which may contribute to poorer outcomes for patients with cLBP. Given the methodological limitations, further qualitative research is needed to confirm and expand on these findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.