Table 1 Excluded classification methods

Bendebba*

[46]

Relied on spatial distribution of patient's pain and results of straight leg raise test only (does not contain a series of tests and examination of trunk movement)

Bergstrom*

[47]

Used questionnaire to subgroup

Bernard & Kirkaldy-Willis*

[48]

Used a retrospective review of medical records, reliance on radiography, injection, and/or spinal surgery to determine subgroups

Binkley

[49]

Survey which discusses MDT, TBC & MSI schemes

DeRosa & Porterfield*

[50]

Classification based on symptom and history only (i.e., acute injury vs. reinjury vs. chronic pain syndrome), no data on validity or intertester reliability

Halpern*

[51]

Provides a taxonomy of functional assessment constructs linked with the International Classification of Impairments, Disabilities & Handicaps (ICIDH)

Harper*

[52]

Structured according to ICIDH as a conceptual framework

Heinrich*

[53]

Numerical classification system requiring the use of a statistical package

International Classification of Functioning (ICF, World Health Organization)*

[54–58]

Scheme does not discriminate between subgroups based on a defined movement examination system, not suitable for evaluation of responses to treatments [59]

Keefe*

[20]

Observation of motor pain behaviour to distinguish levels of guarding and/or bracing

Kilsgaard

[60]

Article in Dutch language

Klapow*

[23]

Psychosocial factor discrimination only, no analysis of physical impairments

Krause*

[61]

Target population consists of occupational low back pain & describes a phase model of disability

Langworthy & Breen

[62]

Requires a highly standardized computerized interview system, identifies two categories (mechanical and cyclic) with undefined treatment decisions

Laslett & van Wijmen

[63]

Not identified as significantly different than MDT approach, no follow-up validity or intertester reliability studies

MacDonald*

[64]

No validity or reliability studies

Main*

[65]

Used questionnaires to identify level of distress (no movement based examination)

McCarthy et al.

[66]

Review which discusses approaches of Barker, Bendebba et al., Bergstrom et al., Binkley et al., Coste et al., Delitto et al. (TBC), DeRosa & Porterfield, Halpern, Harper et al., Heinrich et al., Humphreys, Huyse et al., Keefe et al., Klapow et al., Krause et al., Langworthy & Breen, Laslett & van Wijmen, MacDonald, Main et al., McKenzie & May (MDT), Moffroid et al., Ozguler et al., Petersen et al., Rezaian et al., Sikorski, Spitzer et al., Strong et al., Van Dillen et al. (MSI), and Wilson et al.

Moffroid*

[4]

Uses questionnaires & physical tests of symmetry, passive & dynamic mobility & strength from the National Institute of Occupational Safety & Health Low Back Atlas (Subgroups: Very Unfit, Unfit, Inflexible, Flexible, Very Flexible) but does not define treatment for proposed subgroups

Newton*

[67]

Treatment decision-making for identified subtypes not defined, provides prevalence but no validity or intertester reliability studies

Ozguler*

[68]

Used response from Dallas Pain Questionnaire only.

Petersen

[69]

Review which discusses MDT, Sikorski, Bernard & Kirkaldy-Willis, QTF, TBC, Newton, Kilsgaard schemes

Quebec Task Force (QTF)*

[70]

Certain categories require advanced imaging, categories not mutually exclusive, undefined treatment for categories

Rezaian*

[71]

Relies on patient history only, defines only two types (constant and intermittent), does not outline treatment for subgroups, no validity or intertester reliability studies

Schäfer et al.

[17, 72–75]

Scheme pertains only to low back-related leg pain and hence, not the majority of people with non-specific LBP

Spoto

[76]

Survey which discuss MDT, TBC & MSI schemes

Stiefel*

[59]

Classification relied on response to questionnaire-interview only (INTERMED)

Strong*

[77]

Classification relied on response to a questionnaire-interview only (Integrated Psychosocial Assessment Model)

Wilson

[78]

Philosophical and practical basis derived from the MDT approach with some further category subdivision, not considered significantly distinct from MDT classification system