Acupuncture at <i>Houxi</i> ( <i>SI 3</i> ) acupoint for acute neck pain caused by stiff neck: study protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The use of acupuncture has been suggested for the treatment of acute neck pain caused by stiff neck in China. However, current evidence is insufficient to draw any conclusions about its efficacy. Therefore this pilot study was designed to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of acupuncture at the Houxi (SI3) acupoint for treatment of acute neck pain. METHODS/ANALYSIS: This pilot study will be a two-parallel-group, assessor-blinded, randomised controlled trial. Thirty-six stiff neck participants with acute neck pain will be recruited and randomly divided into two groups in a 1:1 ratio. Participants in the control group will receive massage on the local neck region (5 min each session, three times a day for 3 days). In addition to massage, patients in the treatment group will receive acupuncture (one session a day for 3 days). Measures will be taken at 0, 3 and 15 days. The primary outcome is the Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire (NPQ). The secondary outcome is the Short Form of the McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ). ETHICS/DISSEMINATION: The protocol for this pilot randomised clinical trial has undergone ethics scrutiny and been approved by the ethics review boards of the First Affiliated Hospital of Heilongjiang University of Traditional Chinese Medicine (Permission number: HZYLL201303502). The findings of this study will provide important clinical evidence on the feasibility and efficacy of acupuncture treatment for stiff neck patients with acute neck pain. In addition, it will explore the feasibility of further acupuncture research. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR-TRC-13003911.
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 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 | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".