Massage Therapy for Cervical Degenerative Disc Disease: Alleviating a Pain in the Neck?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A 66-year-old female client with cervical degenerative disc disease at lateral left facet joint C6/C7 was experiencing symptoms of chronic neck pain accompanied by limited cervical range of motion, as well as radicular left shoulder and arm pain. The objective of this case report was to describe the effect of therapeutic massage on the client's symptoms and impairments of cervical DDD. METHODS: Therapeutic massage interventions included soft-tissue manipulation using petrissage and neuromuscular techniques, fascial work, facilitated stretching, joint play, hydrotherapy, education on self-stretching, and positive guidance about condition management. Assessment included pain-free cervical ROM and a subjective verbal pain scale. RESULTS: After several treatment sessions, client's symptoms had decreased and cervical ROM had improved moderately. There was also a decrease in reported pain and an increase in functional daily activities. Client showed a greater understanding of the physiologic barriers which degenerative changes may present. CONCLUSIONS: This client responded favorably to massage therapy as a treatment intervention for cervical DDD symptoms.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".