Study of Applicability of Patient-reported Outcomes for Evaluation of Therapeutic Effect of Acupuncture and Moxibustion on Neck Pain Induced by Cervical Spondylosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To explore the applicability of patient-reported outcomes(PRO) for the evaluation of therapeutic effect of acupuncture and moxibustion for neck pain induced by cervical spondylosis.Methods A multiple randomized control clinical trial was carried out in 896 qualified patients.With Nape Pain Questionnaire(NPN) items as the main indexes of therapeutic effect,PRO mode was used to evaluate the therapeutic effect of acupuncture and moxibustion for the patients with neck pain induced by cervical spondylosis.With McGill Pain Questionnaire(MPQ) and SF-36 life quality questionnaire as reference,we evaluated the reliability,validity and responsiveness of NPQ scores of 896 patients before treatment,after treatment and during follow-up.Results The results of reliability analysis showed that the Cronbach's α coefficient of NPQ scores was 0.769(95% CI:0.761-0.804).The results of content validity analysis showed that NPQ scores were moderately correlated with each dimensions of MPQ,and were moderately or strongly correlated with the somatic pain in SF-36.NPQ scores were mildly correlated with 6 dimensions of SF-36,and were weakly correlated with mental health.The results of structure validity analysis showed that 3 factors selected from NPQ had an accumulative variance contribution rate of 59.3%.The results of the analysis of responsiveness showed that NPQ scores at the end of treatment and 3 months after the follow-up differed from those before treatment(P0.001).Conclusion PRO shows good reliability,validity and responsiveness for the evaluation of therapeutic effect of acupuncture and moxibustion for neck pain induced by cervical spondylosis,which is expected to be extensively used for the clinical research of acupuncture and moxibustion.
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 | 0.035 | 0.041 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".