Dismantling applied tension: mechanisms of a treatment to reduce blood donation–related symptoms
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Blood donation-related symptoms such as dizziness, nausea, and fainting are unpleasant for the donor and a significant disincentive for repeat donation. The muscle tensing technique of applied tension (AT) reduced symptoms in several studies. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This study was a randomized controlled trial of different components of AT. A total of 1209 donors were randomly assigned to one of six conditions involving tension of different muscle groups or donation as usual. Dependent measures included a symptom questionnaire and whether or not the donor's chair was reclined to treat a reaction. RESULTS: Replicating previous findings, donors who practiced the "full" AT procedure reported significantly fewer symptoms, were less likely to require chair reclining, and rated their chances of giving blood again as greater than those in the donation-as-usual group. Of the component groups, donors who tensed only their lower body were most similar to the full-AT group. Upper-body tension in and of itself did not reduce symptoms though another condition involving upper body tension, which directed attention away from the arm with the needle in it had several significant effects. CONCLUSION: The positive effects of AT on blood donation outcome appear to be mediated primarily by lower-body tension though distraction also probably contributes to its impact.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it