Bibliographic record
Abstract
目的观察自制＂颈痛贴膏＂穴位贴敷配合针刺治疗颈型颈椎病的临床疗效。方法将330例颈型颈椎病患者随机分为治疗组（穴位贴敷配合针刺）165例、单纯针刺对照组165例,采用国际简化McGill疼痛量表（MPQ）及《中医病证诊断疗效标准》对2组治疗前后分别进行评估。结果治疗组165例,有效率为90.6%,对照组165例,有效率为70.8%,经统计学处理（P〈0.01）,有显著性差异;2组治疗后疼痛评分均明显下降（P〈0.01）,但治疗组下降程度明显优于对照组（P〈0.05）。结论自制＂颈痛贴膏＂穴位贴敷能明显提高针刺疗法治疗颈型颈椎病的临床疗效。
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".