Abstract vs. full text inconsistencies in LBP reviews

Can we be sure that the message is the same?

This review found that 80% of low back pain (LBP) systematic review abstracts contained some form of spin, which was not associated with the type of conclusion.

More specifically, abstracts of non-Cochrane reviews showed only moderate to fair agreement with the full text. Cochrane reviews, on the contrary, showed substantial to almost perfect agreement with the full text.

The authors conclude that the abstracts of low back pain systematic reviews require improvement.


Curious about the rest of the article?

Sign up as a member of the Anatomy & Physiotherapy Society. 
Check out the benefits of a membership and give it a try today! 
Or have a look at our monthly featured article (free) on our homepage.

Already a member? Login below

Signup for our weekly or monthly newsletter and get notified on updates on the themes you're interested in:

Please enable the javascript to submit this form

Anatomy & Physiotherapy is a joint venture
between SoPhy & Sharing Science

Summaries on Physiotherapy B.V.
Berkenweg 7
Postbus 1161
3800 BD Amersfoort
The Netherlands

Chamber of commerce: 74973738
Bank: NL72ABNA0849809959
V.A.T. number: NL860093530B01

Sharing Science
Rijksweg Zuid 99
6134 AA Sittard
The Netherlands
Chamber of Commerce: 58306862