The Effectiveness of Acupuncture versus Clonazepam in Patients with Burning Mouth Syndrome
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
OBJECTIVE: Burning mouth syndrome (BMS) is a chronic oral condition, characterised by burning symptoms, which mainly affects perimenopausal and postmenopausal women. Neuropathy might be the underlying cause of the condition. There are still insufficient data regarding successful therapy. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of acupuncture and clonazepam. METHODS: Forty-two patients with BMS (38 women, 4 men) aged 66.7±12.0 years were randomly divided into two groups. Acupuncture was performed on 20 participants over 4 weeks, 3 times per week, on points ST8, GB2, TE21, SI19, SI18 and LI4 bilaterally as well as GV20 in the midline, each session lasting half an hour. Twenty-two patients took clonazepam once a day (0.5 mg in the morning) for 2 weeks and, after 2 weeks, two tablets (0.5 mg in the morning and in the evening) were taken for the next 2 weeks. Prior to and 1 month after either therapy, participants completed questionnaires: visual analogue scale, Beck Depression Inventory, Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs (LANSS) pain scale, 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). RESULTS: There were significant improvements in the scores of all outcome measures after treatment with both acupuncture and clonazepam, except for MoCA. There were no significant differences between the two therapeutic regimens regarding the scores of the performed tests. CONCLUSIONS: Acupuncture and clonazepam are similarly effective for patients with BMS.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
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