Therapeutic Observation of Electroacupuncture plus Wheat-grain Moxibustion for Lumbar Intervertebral Disc Herniation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To observe the clinical efficacy of electroacupuncture plus wheat-grain moxibustion in treating lumbar intervertebral disc herniation(LIDH). Method Sixty LIDH patients were randomized into an observation group and a control group by the random number table, 30 in each group. The observation group was intervened by electroacupuncture plus wheat-grain moxibustion, and the control group was by electroacupuncture. The clinical efficacies, modified Japanese Orthopedic Association(M-JOA) scores, and short-form McGill pain questionnaire(SF-MPQ) scores were compared and analyzed. Result The total effective rate was 93.3% in the observation group, significantly different from that in the control group(P0.05); the M-JOA scores increased significantly in both groups(P0.05), the SF-MPQ scores dropped significantly in both groups(P0.05), and the improvements in the observation group were more statistically significant(P0.05). Conclusion Electroacupuncture plus wheat-grain moxibustion can produce better therapeutic efficacy than electroacupuncture alone in treating LIDH.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".