ORIGINAL ARTICLE: Efficacy of C1-C2 Sustained Natural Apophyseal Glide (SNAG) Versus Posterior Anterior Vertebral Mobilization (PAVMs) in the Management of Cervicogenic Headache
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: To determine the effect of a C1-C2 sustained natural apophyseal glide (SNAG) as compare to posterior anterior (PA) vertebral mobilization on cervicogenic headache.Study Design: Randomized Control Trial.Method: The study was conducted on 60 patients with CGH. In this study, patients were divided into two groups, group A and group B equally. Group A of 30 patients received SNAG and at the same time Group B of 30 patients were treated with PAVMs. A pre tested and structured questionnaire was used to collect data. Data was entered and analyzed by using SPSS 19.Outcome Measures: Pain and disability was measured on Visual Analog Scale (VAS) (0-10) and Neck Disability Index (NDI) before and after the treatment.Results: The study showed significant results for both the interventions in the treatment of CGH but SNAG mobilization has been more effective in reducing pain in CGH patients.Conclusions: On the basis of this study, it is proved that cervical SNAGS is more effective for the treatment of cervicegenic headaches as compared to PAVMs.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".