Restauration Fonctionnelle du Rachis : Effet du Niveau Initial de Douleur sur Les Performances des Sujets Lombalgiques Chroniques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Chronic low back pain is a persistent lumbar pain of multifactorial origin. The initial pain level remains poorly used to analyze and compare responses in low back pain patients in a reconditioning program. OBJECTIVE: To assess and evaluate the responses of subjects with very painful chronic low back pain in a dynamic and intensive care program. METHODS: A total of 134 patients with chronic low back pain were included in a spine functional restoration program for five weeks. The subjects were classified into two groups by level of pain: a group experiencing severe pain (n=28) and a group experiencing mild to moderate pain (n=106). All subjects received identical support consisting primarily of physiotherapy, occupational therapy, cardiovascular and muscular reconditioning as well as psychological counselling. The physical parameters (flexibility, muscular strength) and psychological (quality of life) were measured before (T0) and after the program (T5sem). RESULTS: All physical and functional performances of the subjects with severe pain were lower and the impact of back pain on quality of life for these subjects was increased. All significant differences at T0 between the two groups were no longer present at T5sem. DISCUSSION: Muscular atrophy is more important in subjects with severe pain at T0. The intense pain would cause kinesiophobia and central inhibition in chronic low back pain. The analgesic effects of the spine functional restoration program allowed subjects to obtain similar physical, functional and psychological performances at the end of the five weeks of support. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with very painful chronic low back pain respond favourably to the dynamic and intensive program. The intensity of low back pain had no effect on responses to the program. The spine functional restoration program enables patients to better manage their pain, whatever its level.
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 | 0.007 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".