EFFECTS OF AROMATHERAPY AND MASSAGE ON PAIN OF PATIENTS WITH MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS (MS)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BackgroundMultiple sclerosis (MS) is one of common autoimmune diseases with 0.1% incidence in the world population. Pain is one of its clinical manifestations and, according to recent studies, it mostly remains untreated. Pain relief is a primary nursing intervention and, currently, complementary therapies such as massage and aromatherapy are increasingly used for it. PurposeThis quasi-experimental study was conducted to compare between the effects of massage with menthol (aromatherapy) and sweet almond on MS-related pain in patients referring to Mazandaran MS Association in Sari, 2006. Methods80 MS patients were selected by purposive sampling method. Inclusion criteria consisted of age between 20 and 40; no massage prohibition; presence of pain in lumbar or distal extremities; no history of allergy, headache and respiratory diseases. Data were collected by a questionnaire in two parts: demographics and McGill pain scale (0-5). Its validity and reliability were checked by content and internal consistency (r=0.88) methods respectively. Patients were randomly divided into two groups: massage group receiving sweet almond massage and aromatherapy group receiving aromatic (mint abstract) menthol massage. Severity of pain was recorded and compared before and after the intervention. ResultsFinding showed no difference between the groups in terms of demographic data and pain severity before the intervention (P< 0.05). On the other hand, a significant difference was found within (P
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".