Table 4.

Study aim, available outcomes, and main results.

Study	Aim	Primary analysis		Secondary outcomes	Main result	Control condition
		Outcomes	Measurement Times
Chiauzzi et al [29]	Compare interactive self-management website for chronic LBP to standard text-based materials; hypothesized improved emotional management, coping, self-efficacy to manage pain, pain levels, and physical functioning	BPI (Brief Pain Inventory) ODQ (Oswestry Disability Questionnaire) DASS (Depression/Anxiety and Stress Scale) PGIC (Patient Global Impression of Change scale)	Baseline, post-intervention (4 weeks), 3 months, 6 months	PCS (Pain Catastrophizing Scale) FABQ (Fear Avoidance Belief Questionnaire)	Hypothesis not supported	Educational material: “A back pain guide” No reminder emails
Simon et al [35]	Whether insurees with depression or LBP experienced more favorable decision-related outcomes after using a Web-based tailored decision aid compared with non-tailored, static patient information	DCS (Decisional Conflict Scale)	Baseline, post-intervention, 3 months	Preparation for decision-making scale Preference for participation, knowledge Doctor facilitation Information exchange Decision regret Treatment adherence	Intervention effective in short term Follow-up data of >3 months did not suggest further effects of intervention	Same information as intervention, website, but no tailoring to the individual user
Carpenter et al [28]	Efficacy of a pilot version of a Web-based CBT (cognitive behavioral therapy) intervention for chronic LBP	SOPA (Survey of Pain Attitudes)	Baseline, 3 weeks, 6 weeks	FABQ NMR (Negative Mood Regulation scale) PCS RMDQ PSES (Pain Self-Efficacy Scale) Demographics and pain assessment questionnaire	Difference in favor of the intervention group on all SOPA subscales in the SOPA questionnaire except “medical cure”	Wait list, received no care for 3 weeks, then access to website
Krein et al [33] Krein et al [34]a	Whether a pedometer-based, Internet-mediated intervention would reduce pain-related disability and functional interference in chronic LBP	RMDQ (Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire) SF-36 function scale	Baseline, 6 months, 12 months	Pain intensity (NRS, numerical rating scale) Walking (steps/day) FABQ PA (physical activity) subscale Self-efficacy 6-min walking testb CES-D 100b(Centre for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale)	No between-group difference reported at any time-points	Usual care (attending Back Class) and uploading pedometer data after receiving monthly email reminders to upload; no goal-setting or feedback received; no access to website
Irvine et al [32]	Test FitBack for adults at increased risk for chronic LBP due to a recent episode of NLBP	No primary outcome stated ODQ stated as primary outcome in trial registration	Baseline, 8 weeks, 16 weeks	Pain: level, frequency, intensity and duration MPI (Multidimensional Pain Inventory Interference Scale) Dartmouth CO-OP Prevention-helping behaviors (self-developed) WLQ (Work Limitations Questionnaire) SPS (Stanford Presenteeism Scale) PAM (Patient Activation Measures) Knowledge Behavioral intensions Self-efficacy SOPA (modified) TSK (Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia; modified)	No data available for primary outcome analysis	Usual care, emails to request completion of questionnaire
Weymann et al [37] Dirmaier et al [30]a	Investigate effectiveness of a Web-based, tailored, fully automated intervention for patients with type-2 diabetes or chronic LBP against a standard website with identical content without tailoring	Knowledge (post-intervention) Patient empowerment (heiQ, Health Education Impact Questionnaire; 3 months)	Baseline, post-intervention, 3 months	DCS PDMS (Preparation for Decision Making Scale)	The tailored intervention had no effect on the total study population	Same website material as intervention but not tailored; not presented in a dialogue format; no guidance through the content
Geraghty et al [31]a	Explore feasibility of providing an Internet intervention for patients with LBP in primary care, with and without physiotherapist telephone support (in addition to usual care), compared with usual care alone	Feasibility outcome Number need to screen Recruitment rates Login and usage information	Baseline, 3 months	Pain: days, duration, intensity RMDQ StartBack Screen Tool TSK PCS IPAQ (International Physical Activity Questionnaire) PEI (Patient Enablement Instrument) EQ-5D (Euro-Qol 5D) LBP related health care use Time off work CEQ (Credibility and Expectancy Questionnaire) SESE (Self-Efficacy for Exercise Scale) PETS (Problematic Experiences of Therapy Scale)	-	Usual care from their general practitioner; this may consist of education and self-management advice, including advice to stay active
Valenzuela-Pascual et al [36]a	Evaluate effect of a biopsychosocial Web-based, educational intervention for chronic LBP based on pain intensity compared with normal care	Pain intensity (100-mm VAS [visual analogue scale] scale)	Baseline, 2 weeks	FABQ TSK PCS RMDQ SF-36	-	No intervention; asked to return to webpage to complete questionnaire at 2 weeks
Amorim et al [27]a	Investigate effect of a patient-centered PA intervention supported by health coaching and technology in chronic LBP	Care-seeking Pain levels (NRS) RMDQ	Baseline, weekly during intervention, 6 months, 12 months	IPAQ Actigraph accelerometer GAS (Goal Attainment Scale)	-	Educational material same as intervention: “Make your move—Sit less, be active for life!”; advice to work toward increasing PA and achieving long-term goals

^aProtocol paper, no data available.

^bDifference between the protocol paper and RCT report.