MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2323722157 · doi:10.9790/0853-13854147

Effectiveness of Acupuncture and Acupuncture-like Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (ACUTENS) in treating primary dysmenorrhea- A randomised controlled trial (RCT)

2014· article· en· W2323722157 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sokunbi Og, L Rosemary, Peter Robinson

Bibliographic record

VenueIOSR Journal of Dental and Medical Sciences · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMenstrual Health and Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAcupunctureRandomized controlled trialTranscutaneous electrical nerve stimulationPhysical therapyStimulationAlternative medicineSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: the purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of acupuncture and study to acupuncture-like transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation in treating primary dysmenorrhea Methods: Subjects: Eligible women were aged 11-30 years with a diagnosis of primary dysmenorrhea.Twelve subjects each were randomized to control, acupuncture and ACUTENS groups.All subjects completed two pain questionnaires (Pain Rating Index (PRI) of McGill Pain Questionnaire and Visual Analogue Scale) before treatment; immediately post treatment; 30, 60, 120 post-treatment and the next morning upon awakening.The data were treated as means and standard deviation analyzed with one way analysis of variance and Bonferroni post hoc analysis test.Results: The mean pretreatment PRI values for the control (29.33+ 2.8), acupuncture (29.17+ 2.4), and ACUTENS (29.28 +2.6) groups did not show statistical significant difference (F= .016,P=0.985).However, a decline in the mean PRI values for the acupuncture (14.42+ 2.49) and ACUTENS (13.83 +3.13) groups were recorded immediately post treatment which were also statistically significant (F= 87.30, P=0.00).The decline in the PRI and VAS scores recorded immediately post treatments were maintained at 30mins, 60mins 120 min post treatment and the next day in the acupuncture and ACUTENS groups.Similarly, the mean VAS values immediately post treatment for control (4.75+ 1.76), acupuncture (1.25+ 0.62) and ACUTENS (1.33 +0.65) showed statistical significant difference (F= 35.59,P=0.00).Post hoc analysis of the difference in PRI and VAS scores, between Acupuncture and ACUTENS groups did not show statistically significant difference at any point of data collection (P > 0.05).The overall percentage improvements in PRI scores were 10.41%, 50.23% and 52.26% for the control, acupuncture and ACUTENS groups respectively.Similarly, the overall improvement in VAS scores were 8.89%, 74.58% and 75.56% for the control, acupuncture and ACUTENS groups respectively.Conclusion: The outcome of this study showed that acupuncture and low frequency and high intensity TENS/ acupuncture like TENS treatment could be effective in treating pain due to primary dysmenorhea.Findings from this study also showed that pain relief was approximately the same for the acupuncture and the ACUTENS groups over time.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.286 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIOSR Journal of Dental and Medical SciencesSame topicMenstrual Health and DisordersFrench-language works237,207