PMC full text: | Published online 2015 Aug 19. doi: 10.1186/s12891-015-0632-0
|
Table 2
Responders (N = 297/94)b | Future pain intensity (N = 289/94)b | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Independent variables | OR | (95 % CI) | P-value | β | (95 % CI) | P-value | |
Dose (per 6 spinal manipulation visits) | 1.27 | (1.08, 1.49) | 0.004 | −1.86 | (−3.35, −0.38) | 0.014 | |
Pain/Disability | |||||||
Pain intensity | 4.77 | (1.85, 7.70) | 0.001 | ||||
Pain unpleasantness | 3.29 | (0.35, 6.24) | 0.028 | ||||
General Health | |||||||
Comorbidities | 0.81 | (0.67, 0.97) | 0.025 | ||||
EuroQol – VAS | −2.20 | (−4.00, −0.39) | 0.017 | ||||
EuroQol 5D – self-care (1–3) | 0.64 | (0.41, 0.99) | 0.044 | ||||
Objective Physical Exam | |||||||
LBP: sum for 4 lumbar ROM pain scores | 0.81 | (0.67, 0.97) | 0.024 | 2.89 | (0.61, 5.16) | 0.013 | |
Performance metricsc | AUC | (95 % CI) | RMSE | (95 % CI) | R2 | (95 % CI) | |
Training set | 0.624 | 17.4 | .268 | ||||
Test set | 0.479 | (0.387, 0.575) | 19.4 | (17.0, 21.6) | .065 | (−10.5, 21.9) |
aVariables were selected into the regression models using forward selection among variables with p < .05 in the univariate analysis; dose was forced into the models. Independent variables were standardized except for dose (scale unit = 6 visits) and self-care (scale unit = 1 on a 1–3 scale). Lower scores were favorable for pain and self-care; higher scores for EuroQol VAS
bThe first number is the sample size for the model in the training set and the second number is the N for the test set
cChance performance is indicated by 0.5 for AUC. RMSE is the standard deviation of the error in prediction of future pain intensity evaluated on the 0 – 100 pain scale. R 2 is the proportion of the variance in pain intensity explained by the independent variables in the model. Confidence intervals for the performance metrics are given for the test set only