MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1709618161 · doi:10.1089/acm.2015.0065

The Use of Wet Cupping for Persistent Nonspecific Low Back Pain: Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

2015· article· en· W1709618161 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcupuncture Treatment Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialConfidence intervalAcupunctureAcetaminophenPhysical therapyAdverse effectLow back painClinical trialCupping therapyMcGill Pain QuestionnaireVisual analogue scaleInternal medicineAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of wet cupping therapy as a single treatment for persistent nonspecific low back pain (PNSLBP). DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial comparing wet cupping versus no treatment in PNSLBP. SETTING: Outpatient clinic in three secondary care hospitals in Saudi Arabia. PATIENTS: Eighty eligible participants with PNSLBP for at least 3 months were randomly allocated to an intervention group (n=40) or to a control group (n=40). INTERVENTIONS: Six wet cupping sessions within 2 weeks, each of which were done at two bladder meridian (BL) acupuncture points among BL23, BL24, and BL25. Only acetaminophen was allowed as a rescue treatment in both groups. OUTCOME MEASURES: The Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), McGill Present Pain Intensity (PPI), and Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (ODQ) were used as outcome measures. Numbers of acetaminophen tablets taken were compared at 4 weeks from baseline. Adverse events were recorded. RESULTS: At the end of the intervention, statistically significant differences in the three outcome measures favoring the wet cupping group compared with the control group were seen: NRS score, 29.2 (95% confidence interval [CI], 24.6-33.8) versus 57.9 (95% CI, 53.3-62.6), respectively; PPI score, 1.17 (95% CI, 0.96-1.4) versus 2.3 (95% CI, 2.1- 2.7); and ODQ score, 19.6 (95% CI, 16.5-22.7) versus 35.4 (95% CI, 32.3-38.5) (p=0.0001). This improvement continued for another 2 weeks after the end of the intervention. Acetaminophen was used less in the wet cupping group, but this difference was not statistically significant. No adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Wet cupping is potentially effective in reducing pain and improving disability associated with PNSLBP at least for 2 weeks after the end of the wet cupping period. Placebo-controlled trials are needed.

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.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.232
Threshold uncertainty score0.762

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.365
GPT teacher head0.447
Teacher spread0.083 · 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