MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139719647

Canalith repositioning maneuver for benign paroxysmal positional vertigo: randomized controlled trial in family practice.

2007· article· en· W2139719647 on OpenAlexaff
Jonel T. Miklea, Michelle Howard, Russ Springate, Janusz Kaczorowski

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVestibular and auditory disorders
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialBenign paroxysmal positional vertigoConfidence intervalVertigoRelative riskPsychological interventionPhysical therapyPediatricsSurgeryInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the canalith repositioning maneuver (CRM) is effective for treating benign paroxysmal positional vertigo when it is used by family physicians in primary care settings. DESIGN: Randomized, prospective, double-blind, sham-controlled trial. SETTING: An academic family practice in Hamilton, Ont. PARTICIPANTS: Eighty-one patients 18 years or older whose dizziness was confirmed by the Dix-Hallpike (DH) vertigo-triggering maneuver and who had no contraindications to the CRM. INTERVENTIONS: At the first visit, the intervention group received the CRM and the control group received a sham maneuver. Both groups received the CRM at the second and third visits 1 and 2 weeks later. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Negative results of the DH test or self-reported resolution of vertigo after the initial treatment. RESULTS: Eighty-one patients were randomized and received the first treatment. After the first treatment, 34.2% of patients in the intervention group and 14.6% of patients in the control group had negative DH test results (relative risk 2.3, 95% confidence interval 1.03 to 5.2, P = .04); and 31.6% of patients in the intervention group and 24.4% of patients in the control group reported resolution of dizziness (relative risk 1.2, 95% confidence interval 0.7 to 1.9, P = .48). One week later, patients in both intervention and control groups received the CRM, and 61.8% and 57.1% of them, respectively, had negative DH test results (P = .81). By week 3, approximately 75% of patients in both groups had improved. CONCLUSION: A statistically significant proportion of patients in the CRM group returned to a negative response to the DH maneuver immediately after the first treatment. Family physicians can use the CRM to treat benign paroxysmal positional vertigo and potentially avoid delays in treatment and unnecessary referrals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00182273 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
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

Citations61
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicVestibular and auditory disordersFrench-language works237,207