Comparative Study on Clinical Efficacy Between Electroacupuncture and Tuina in Treating Knee Osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To compare the clinical efficacy between electroacupuncture and Tuina therapies for knee osteoarthritis(KOA).Methods Forty KOA cases were divided into two groups: treatment group in which 20 cases were treated by electroacupuncture and control group in which another 20 cases were treated by Tuina,with a course of one month.Western Ontario MacMaster(WOMAC) scores were observed in the two groups before,during and after treatments.Results After 2-week and 4-week treatments,the WOMAC scores of overall symptoms,pain,stiffness and daily activity were reduced in both groups in comparison with before treatments(P0.01);and the scores were reduced more significantly in treatment group than in control group(P0.05,P0.01).The improvement rate was higher in treatment group than in control group(P0.01).Conclusion Electroacupuncture and Tuina are quite effective for KOA,but electroacupuncture works better than Tuina.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".