Effectiveness of combined acupuncture and manual therapy relative to no treatment for canine musculoskeletal pain.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the rise in popularity of both acupuncture and manual therapy in veterinary medicine, and the increasing number of Canadian veterinarians practising these techniques, there is little research demonstrating their effectiveness. In this repeated measures, therapeutic trial, 47 client-owned dogs with naturally occurring lameness were assessed for clinical response to treatment. Owners were blinded to the treatment schedule and completed questionnaires to assess their dogs' comfort and mobility. Comparison between pre- and post-treatment results demonstrated that combined acupuncture and manual therapy provides immediate short-term improvement in comfort and mobility, as demonstrated by owner observed changes in play behavior (P = 0.015), walking (P < 0.001), trotting (P = 0.002), jumping (P < 0.001), descending stairs (P = 0.003), rising from a lying position (P < 0.001), and reduced stiffness after rest (P < 0.001) or following exercise (P < 0.001). Mood and attitude also improved, but did not attain statistical significance.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".