MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1588905076

Kajian Teknologi Kesehatan atas Perbedaan Efek Analgesia dari Elektroakupunktur dengan Frekuensi Rendah, Kombinasi, dan Tinggi, pada Nyeri Punggung Bawah

2011· article· id· W1588905076 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Syarif Sudirman, Hargiyanto Hargiyanto

Bibliographic record

VenueBuletin Penelitian Sistem Kesehatan · 2011
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldHealth Professions
TopicSports and Physical Education Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineElectroacupuncturePost-hoc analysisAcupunctureAnesthesiaSignificant differenceAnalysis of varianceMcGill Pain QuestionnaireRandomized controlled trialPhysical therapySurgeryInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Low back pain (LBP) was an important public health problem which ranked second after upper respiratory infectionin adults. WHO has recommended acupuncture for pain treatment. However, there was a lack of study that show the optimal frequency of electroacupuncture for pain treatment. This study aimed to determine the optimal frequency of electroacupuncture for the treatment of low back pain. This study was a double blind randomized controlled trial. A sampleof 40 subjects was selected at random of all (60) patients visiting the acupuncture clinic at Puskesmas Sragen Kota from September to Desember 2007. The subjects consist of 10 control subjects (paracetamol), 10 electroacupuncture subjects with low frequency (2Hz), 10 subjects with combined frequency (20/50Hz), and 10 subjects with high frequency (100Hz). The electroacupuncture was administered for 7 times. Pain was measured twice, before and after the treatment, using of McGill Pain Questionnaire. The data was analyzed with F test (ANOVA) and Post Hoc Test, which was run on SPSS v.15 program. Results of the study showed statistically significant different in the reduction of pain before and after the electroacupuncture treatment (F = 6.60; p = 0.001). There was a statistically significant different in pain reduction between control and low frequency (score difference -10.4; p = 0.032), control and combined frequency (score difference -1 2.1;p = 0.015), and control and high frequency as well (score difference -16.1; p = 0.004). Difference in the pain reduction was statistically non-significant between low and combined frequencies (score difference -1. 7; p = 0. 999), between combined and high frequencies (score difference -4.0; p = 0.928), between low and high frequencies as well (score difference -5. 7;p = 0. 726). This study concluded that the lowest frequency of electroacupuncture was the most optimal for pain reduction.Therefore, this study recommended the use of low frequency of 2 Hz for treating low back pain by electroacupuncture.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.005

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.

Opus teacher head0.104
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.261 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBuletin Penelitian Sistem KesehatanSame topicSports and Physical Education ResearchFrench-language works237,207