MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005232819 · doi:10.2310/7200.2007.017

Research on Therapeutic Massage for Cancer Patients: Potential Biologic Mechanisms

2007· review· en· W2005232819 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Stephen M. Sagar, Trish Dryden, Cynthia D. Myers

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Society for Integrative Oncology · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicComplementary and Alternative Medicine Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMassageMedicineCancerPhysical medicine and rehabilitationNeurosciencePhysical therapyPathologyPsychologyAlternative medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is preliminary evidence that therapeutic massage is a useful modality for the relief of a variety of symptoms and symptom-related distress affecting cancer patients. Mechanistic studies are necessary to delineate underlying biologic and psychological effects of massage and their relationship to outcomes. The current article discusses a model for using nuclear magnetic resonance techniques to capture dynamic in vivo responses to biomechanical changes induced in the soft tissues by massage. This model enables study of the communication of soft tissue changes to activity in the subcortical central nervous system. We hypothesize that the therapeutic components of massage are twofold: (1) a rapid direct effect on local fascia, muscle, and nerves and (2) a slower delayed effect on the subcortical central nervous system that ultimately incorporates remodeling of plastic neuronal connections. This testable model has important implications for mechanistic research on massage for symptom control of cancer patients since it opens up new research avenues that link objective physiologic indices with the effects of massage on the subjective experience of pain and other symptoms.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.954
Threshold uncertainty score0.752

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.005
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.318
GPT teacher head0.563
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations8
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Society for Integrative OncologySame topicComplementary and Alternative Medicine StudiesFrench-language works237,207