MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013519302 · doi:10.2310/7200.2007.014

Developing Treatment and Control Conditions in a Clinical Trial of Massage Therapy for Advanced Cancer

2007· article· en· W2013519302 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marlaine C. Smith, Jean S. Kutner, Linnea Hemphill, Traci E. Yamashita, Susanne Felton

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Society for Integrative Oncology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicComplementary and Alternative Medicine Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMassageMedicineExpectancy theoryPhysical therapyProtocol (science)Clinical trialAdverse effectCancer treatmentCancerCancer therapyLife expectancyAlternative medicineInternal medicinePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this article is to describe the challenges faced by a research team in developing treatment and control conditions in a study of the efficacy of massage therapy for advanced cancer. Five design considerations were addressed related to developing a massage therapy protocol: (1) dosage, that is, the number, spacing and length of treatments; (2) type of massage therapy; (3) degree to which the protocol for the treatment is standardized; (4) qualifications of the persons providing the treatment; and (5) conditions under which the treatment is provided. Five criteria for structuring the control condition of the study are elaborated: (1) equivalency of contact; (2) similarity of form; (3) minimum adverse or negative effects; (4) expectancy of therapeutic benefit; and (5) minimum therapeutic benefit.

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)0.198
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.271
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.802
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1980.271
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.008
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0070.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.139
GPT teacher head0.527
Teacher spread0.388 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
DomainMethods
GenreMethods

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

Citations10
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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