Chinese Massage Combined with Herbal Ointment for Athletes with Nonspecific Low Back Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Non-specific low back pain (NLBP) is an increasing health problem for athletes. This randomized controlled trial was designed to investigate the effects of Chinese massage combined with herbal ointment for NLBP. 110 athletes with NLBP were randomly assigned to experimental group with Chinese massage combined with herbal ointment or control group with simple massage therapy. The primary outcome was pain by Chinese Short Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (C-SFMPQ). The secondary outcome was local muscle stiffness by Myotonometer. After 4 weeks, the experimental group experienced significant improvements in C-SFMPQ and in local muscle stiffness compared with control group (between-group difference in mean change from baseline, -1.24 points, P = 0.005 in sensory scores; -3.14 points, P < 0.001 in affective scores; -4.39 points, P < 0.001 in total scores; -0.64 points, P = 0.002 in VAS; -1.04 points, P = 0.005 in local muscle stiffness during relaxation state). The difference remained at one month followup, but it was only significant in affective scores (-2.83 points, P < 0.001) at three months followup. No adverse events were observed. These findings suggest that Chinese massage combined with herbal ointment may be a beneficial complementary and alternative therapy for athletes with NLBP.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it