Acupuncture in Subacute Stroke: No Benefits Detected
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is debate concerning the effect of acupuncture on rehabilitation following stroke, with key reviews unable to find evidence of benefit. This lack of evidence may be due to poor study design, small sample size, and insufficient theoretical background. OBJECTIVE: The present study was designed to determine whether acupuncture combined with conventional physical therapy improves motor function and activities of daily living in patients with subacute stroke compared with conventional physical therapy alone. DESIGN: A multicenter, single-blinded, randomized study was conducted. SETTING: Four rehabilitation centers in the Jiangsu province of China participated in this study. PATIENTS: One hundred eighty-eight patients with subacute stroke admitted to the hospital were randomized into an acupuncture group and a conventional rehabilitation group. INTERVENTIONS: A combination of body and scalp acupuncture was used for 3 months in the acupuncture group. All patients underwent conventional stroke rehabilitation. MEASUREMENTS: The Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) and Barthel Index (BI) were performed at baseline and at 1, 3, and 6 months after inclusion in the study. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were found at baseline between the groups. No statistically significant differences were found between the groups using the FMA motor scores and the BI scores at baseline or at 1, 3, or 6 months. Significant improvements were found in each group following treatment. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with subacute stroke, the addition of body and scalp acupuncture to a regimen of conventional physical therapy does not result in further improvement in either motor function or ADL beyond the effect of conventional physical therapy alone.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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".