The Effect of Repeated Zygapophysial Joint Radiofrequency Neurotomy on Pain, Disability, and Improvement Duration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of repeated radiofrequency neurotomy (RFN) on pain, disability, and treatment effect duration. PATIENTS: One hundred-four patients who underwent repeat RFN for chronic neck or back pain were prospectively followed using a Pain Disability Questionnaire-Spine (PDQ-S). Complete data sets were available for 73, 73, and 36 patients for the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd RFN, respectively. RESULTS: Pain intensity, pain frequency, and patient-specific disability measures were significantly improved post-initial, second, and third RFN. Moreover, there was no statistically significant difference among the PDQ-S scores post-RFN 1, 2, and 3. There was no statistical significance between the duration of pain relief post-RFN 1 and pain relief post-RFD 2. CONCLUSION: Repeated cervical and lumbar RFN reduces pain and disability with equal effectiveness for approximately 10 months in patients with facetogenic chronic neck and back pain.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".