Amaral DDV, Miyamoto GC, Franco KFM, et al. - A total of 222 patients received advice and were randomly allotted to an educational booklet group who did not receive additional treatment (n = 74) or a Pilates group (n = 148) who received treatment two or three times a week by the experts in order to examine whether two formerly published classification approaches, ie, updated treatment-based classification system (TBCS) and Pilates subgroup defined by a preliminary clinical prediction rule (CPR) could recognize patients with low back pain (LBP) who profit more from Pilates in comparison with an educational booklet. For pain and disability, none of the interaction terms were statistically important. Therefore, the impact of treatment (Pilates vs an educational booklet) was comparable in all subgroups. In conclusion, the TBCS and the Pilates CPR were unable to recognize the subgroups of patients with chronic LBP who are prone to profit more from Pilates, in contrast, with an educational booklet.