Positive Effects of Massage Therapy on a Patient with Narcolepsy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this case report was to investigate the effects of massage therapy on the sleep patterns of a woman with narcolepsy. PARTICIPANT: The 23-year-old woman's primary symptoms included excessive daytime sleepiness and periodic leg movements (PLM), which were associated with her diagnoses of both narcolepsy and cataplexy. INTERVENTION: Five 45-minute massage therapy treatments were administered over a five-week period. The patient's sleep patterns were recorded each week before the treatment. A final measurement was recorded in the sixth week. The sleep patterns were monitored using the Leeds Sleep Evaluation Questionnaire, which included ten visual analogue scales. RESULTS: The results of this case report included an improvement in getting to sleep by 148%, an improvement in quality of sleep by 1100%, an improvement in awake following sleep by 121%, and an improvement in behaviour following wakening by 28% using the Leeds Sleep Evaluation Questionnaire. CONCLUSION: This case report suggests that massage therapy had a positive effect on this patient with narcolepsy. Further research is needed to investigate the effects of massage therapy on narcolepsy and sleep patterns.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".