MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061538841 · doi:10.1016/s0161-4754(01)40866-9

Chiropractic care of a patient with vertebral subluxations and unsuccessful surgery of the cervical spine

2001· article· en· W2061538841 on OpenAlexaff
Joel Alcantara, Gregory Plaugher, Richard E. Thornton, Chris Salem

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical and Thoracic Myelopathy
Canadian institutionsCanadian Chiropractic Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineChiropracticNeck painSubluxationSpinal manipulationManual therapySurgeryRehabilitationPhysical therapyCervical spineAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The chiropractic care of a patient with vertebral subluxations, neck pain, and cervical radiculopathy after a cervical diskectomy is described. CLINICAL FEATURES: A 55-year-old man had neck pain and left upper extremity radiculopathy after unsuccessful cervical spine surgery. INTERVENTION AND OUTCOME: Contact-specific, high-velocity, low-amplitude adjustments (i.e., Gonstead technique) were applied to sites of vertebral subluxations. Rehabilitation exercises were also used as adjunct to care. The patient reported a decrease in neck pain and left arm pain after chiropractic intervention. The patient also demonstrated a marked increase in range of motion (ROM) of the left glenohumeral articulation. CONCLUSION: The chiropractic care of a patient with neck pain and left upper extremity radiculopathy after cervical diskectomy is presented. Marked resolution of the patient's symptoms was obtained concomitant with a reduction in subluxation findings at multiple levels despite the complicating history of an unsuccessful cervical spine surgery. This is the first report in the indexed literature of chiropractic care after an unsuccessful cervical spine surgery.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.158
Threshold uncertainty score0.186

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.178
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.155 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations10
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Manipulative and Physiological TherapeuticsSame topicCervical and Thoracic MyelopathyFrench-language works237,207