Bibliographic record
Abstract
The value of writing and of publishing case reports in a profession has long been recognized; multiple articles explain the importance of case studies, (1,2) and how to do them. (3-6) However, having recommendations to publish case reports and in what to include in those reports doesn’t automatically result in either a uniform approach to published reports, or inclusion of all appropriate or necessary information to make the case report valuable. Therefore, just as international groups have developed guidelines regarding the appropriate writing and publishing of manuscripts for clinical trials (CONSORT Statement), meta-analysis and systematic reviews (PRISMA Statement), and the Strobe Statement for observational studies, a similar effort has been done for case studies: the CARE Statement (www.care-statement.org). The IJTMB will be endorsing the CARE Statement, and recommending the use of the framework for the writing, reviewing, and publishing of case reports. However, the IJTMB’s Practice Section Editor and Editor-in-Chief rightfully recognized the limitations of the CARE Statement—developed generally for the health care field—with regard to specific issues in the practice of therapeutic massage and bodywork (TMB). The article in this issue by Munk and Boulanger is an important review of the CARE Statement from the perspective of TMB practice, and introduces a template for case reports specific to TMB practice and reporting. In addition to the template being highly recommended for publishing in the IJTMB (and hopefully for other physical manipulation health care practice journals), I hope that this work is taken to the next level: a formal TMB CARE Statement extension, much like the Non-Pharmacologic Treatment Interventions extension to the CONSORT Statement. Only by ensuring that our case reports are including all the information needed can we ensure that the case reports have enduring value to—and impact on—the profession. These developments in international standards for case report publication are most welcome. Copyright Published under the CreativeCommons Attribution
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 | 0.131 | 0.618 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.024 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.031 | 0.030 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.138 | 0.128 |
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".