MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016307022 · doi:10.1159/000328447

Effects of Percutaneous Tibial Nerve Stimulation Therapy on Chronic Pelvic Pain

2012· article· en· W2016307022 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueGynecologic and Obstetric Investigation · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcGill University
KeywordsMedicineQuality of life (healthcare)Pelvic painSexual lifePhysical therapyPercutaneousSurgeryGynecologyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This research is a prospective study which was designed to determine the effects of percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation (PTNS) therapy on the quality of life and sexual life of patients with chronic pelvic pain (CPP). METHODS: The sample consisted of an experimental group (n = 12) and a control group (n = 12), in total 24 patients. The experimental group was treated with PTNS once a week (in total 12 sessions), while the control group received routine intervention. RESULTS: The pain frequency and intensity in women who underwent PTNS decreased considerably. Women had less pain during sexual intercourse after PTNS. We determined in our study that PTNS improved the quality of life of women with CPP by decreasing the intensity of pain and contributed to a more comfortable performance of their daily activities. CONCLUSIONS: PTNS is a type of treatment which contributes to the quality of life of women with CPP by decreasing the intensity of pain.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.495
Threshold uncertainty score0.429

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.228 · 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