Acupuncture Middle Line of Forehead and Acupuncture Point of Kidney Channel in the Treatment of Mild Cognitive Impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective:To observe the clinical therapeutic effect of the combination of acupuncture middle line of forehead and acupuncture point of kidney channel on mild cognitive impairment.Methods:90 patients were selected from the diagnosis of MCI.They were divided into three groups at random.The patients of three groups were treated with filiform needle acupuncture.Efficacy was assessed by the mini-mental state examination,the montreal cognitive scale before and after treatments.Results:Acupuncture middle line of forehead and acupuncture point of kidney channel group compared with acupuncture middle line of forehead group,acupuncture point of kidney channel group,the MMSE scores and MoCA scores changed significantly(P0.05).Acupuncture middle line of forehead group compared with acupuncture point of kidney channel group,the MMSE scores and MoCA scores were no significant(P0.05).Conclusion:It's better to acupuncture middle line of forehead and acupuncture point of kidney channel than that of solely acupuncture middle line of forehead or acupuncture point of kidney channel.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".