Notice bibliographique
Résumé
I thank the responder for his comments1 on our article.2 I believe this commentary helps to highlight a key point made in the article and perhaps challenges the editorial process associated with PTJ. I regret that Tygiel feels this article will have little clinical benefit to others. It represents a culmination of a tremendous amount of work, and obviously we believe that it makes an important contribution to the physical therapy profession. It supports a change in practice, which is to reduce the use of short treatments of low-intensity pulsed ultrasound that deliver extremely low amounts of ultrasound energy. In addition to changing clinical practice, we must change how clinical trials are conducted and what is considered when conducting systematic reviews. If readers read the full text of our article, they will see that we agree with Tygiel's point that current research is not helping us determine whether ultrasound will aid the treatment of people with shoulder disorders. In particular, the amount of energy delivered in the treatment arm of clinical trials must be “adequate” if we are to evaluate the effectiveness of any physical therapy intervention. With the popularity of systematic reviews and meta-analyses used to evaluate clinical treatments, the appropriateness of treatment parameters (not just methodological quality) must be considered when drawing conclusions about the treatment outcomes. Although the title may not have been best, I do believe the conclusions in the abstract and the results and discussion sections of the article accurately reflect the current literature. Unfortunately, there is not enough evidence to support a suggestion that higher doses of ultrasound are effective in treating people with shoulder disorders. My hope is that third-party payers will venture beyond the title and at least read the conclusion section of the abstract. The title used in this article was not one submitted by the authors of this article and was not considered by the manuscript reviewers. It was in the final stages of editorial production that the title was changed to the current version so that it would be consistent with PTJ's move to promote the use of active, more informative article titles. In fact, a revised title suggested by the editor in chief was “There is not strong evidence to support the use of therapeutic ultrasound for soft tissue shoulder pathology: a systematic review.” I suspect this title would have fueled to an even greater extent the valid concerns raised about the negative impact on the evidence-based practice movement. Perhaps this discussion will stimulate a review of this editorial practice of PTJ.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».