↓ Skip to main content

The association between body fat and musculoskeletal pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#50 of 4,426)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
136 X users
facebook
10 Facebook pages
video
2 YouTube creators

Citations

dimensions_citation
100 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
240 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The association between body fat and musculoskeletal pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, July 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12891-018-2137-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tom P. Walsh, John B. Arnold, Angela M. Evans, Alison Yaxley, Raechel A. Damarell, E. Michael Shanahan

Abstract

Obesity and musculoskeletal pain are strongly related, but there is emerging evidence that body fat, not body weight, may be a better indicator of risk. There is, therefore, a need to determine if body fat is associated with musculoskeletal pain as it may improve management strategies. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate the association between body fat and musculoskeletal pain. Seven electronic databases were searched from inception to 8th January 2018. Cross-sectional and longitudinal studies investigating the association between measures of body fat and musculoskeletal pain were included. All included articles were assessed for methodological rigour using the Epidemiology Appraisal Instrument. Standardised mean differences (SMDs) and effect estimates were pooled for meta-analysis. A total of 10,221 citations were identified through the database searching, which after abstract and full-text review, yielded 28 unique articles. Fourteen studies were included in the meta-analyses, which found significant cross-sectional associations between total body fat mass and widespread pain (SMD 0.49, 95% CI 0.37-0.61, p < 0.001). Individuals with low-back pain and knee pain had a higher body fat percentage than asymptomatic controls (SMD 0.34, 95% CI 0.17-0.52, p < 0.001 and SMD 0.18, 95% CI 0.05-0.32, p = 0.009, respectively). Fat mass index was significantly, albeit weakly, associated with foot pain (SMD 0.05, 95% CI 0.03-0.06, p < 0.001). Longitudinal studies (n = 8) were unsuitable for meta-analysis, but were largely indicative of elevated body fat increasing the risk of incident and worsening joint pain. There was conflicting evidence for an association between body fat percentage and incident low-back pain (3 studies, follow-up 4-20 years). Increasing knee pain (1 study) and incident foot pain (2 studies) were positively associated with body fat percentage and fat mass index. The percentage of items in the EAI graded as 'yes' for each study ranged from 23 to 85%, indicating variable methodological quality of the included studies. This systematic review and meta-analysis identified positive cross-sectional associations between increased body fat and widespread and single-site joint pain in the low-back, knee and foot. Longitudinal studies suggest elevated body fat may infer increased risk of incident and worsening joint pain, although further high-quality studies are required.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 136 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 240 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 240 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 34 14%
Student > Bachelor 31 13%
Researcher 17 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 6%
Other 46 19%
Unknown 80 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 50 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 36 15%
Sports and Recreations 15 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 3%
Social Sciences 6 3%
Other 34 14%
Unknown 93 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 86. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 September 2022.
All research outputs
#498,823
of 25,547,904 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#50
of 4,426 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,675
of 340,901 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#3
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,547,904 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,426 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 340,901 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.