MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995975935 · doi:10.7205/milmed-d-11-00013

Effectiveness of Acupressure and Acustimulation in Minimizing Driving Simulation Adaptation Syndrome

2011· article· en· W1995975935 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel J. Cox, Harsimran Singh, Douglas M. Cox

Bibliographic record

VenueMilitary Medicine · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicPain Management and Placebo Effect
Canadian institutionsCanadian Chiropractic Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcupressurePlaceboMotion sicknessMedicineNauseaCrossover studyAnalysis of variancePhysical therapyRepeated measures designAnesthesiaInternal medicinePsychiatryStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigated the efficacy of acupressure and acustimulation in alleviating symptoms of Simulation Adaptation Syndrome (SAS). Twenty-five drivers (mean age = 35.6) reporting a history of driving-related sickness, motion sickness, and/or seasickness were recruited for a within subject, repeated-measures crossover study. Of all participants, 16 reported SAS during a placebo condition. These 16 participants drove the Atari research simulator for 15 minutes on 3 separate days (same time each day), wearing: (a) a placebo device, (b) acupressure beads, and (c) an acu-stimulation device. Every 3 minutes during each drive, participants rated their physical discomfort. Overall, the analysis of variance condition effect was significant (p < 0.05). Participants in the acustimulation condition reported significantly less physical discomfort (p < 0.005) compared with the placebo. There were no significant differences between the acupressure and placebo conditions or the acupressure and acustimulation conditions. These data suggest that acustimulation can help to significantly reduce or prevent SAS-related nausea and physical discomfort.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.224 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
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

Citations6
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMilitary MedicineSame topicPain Management and Placebo EffectFrench-language works237,207