A Randomized Trial Comparing the VIPON Tampon and Ibuprofen for Dysmenorrhea Pain Relief
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study was conducted to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of a device designed to deliver high-frequency vibratory stimulation through direct intravaginal tampon application (VIPON) compared with a low-dose over-the-counter pharmacologic treatment of dysmenorrhea. METHODS: A randomized, open-label, prospective study comparing the investigational device to an oral self-administration of the over-the-counter dose of 200-400 mg of ibuprofen with the onset of menstrual discomfort was conducted at two academic medical centers in the Midwest region of the United States. Women age 18 and older with self-reported dysmenorrhea were treated with either VIPON or a single dose of 200-400 mg of ibuprofen, randomized for each of the next four menstrual cycles, and pain reduction from baseline was measured according to the Melzack-McGill pain scale. RESULTS: Overall, both ibuprofen and VIPON have significant effects on pain reduction according to the Melzack-McGill pain scale. However, the VIPON group achieved statistically significant greater, and more rapid, pain relief at every time point when compared with the ibuprofen. CONCLUSION: VIPON tampon is a viable, nonpharmacologic option to traditional low-dose over-the-counter pharmacologic therapies for menstrual pain management with more rapid onset of action.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".