Clinical observation of 80 patients with lumbar intervertebral disc protrusion treated with Zhuang Medical massage combined with fire needle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To observ e the clinical effects of Zhuang Medical massage combined with fire needle on 80 lumbar intervertebral disc protrusion patients.Methods 160 patients were randomly divided into treatment group(80 cases) and control group(80 cases).The treatment group was treated with Zhuang Medical massage combined with fire needle and the control group was treated with fire needle treatment.Treatment was given once every 3 days.A treatment course had 6 times.Efficacy was evaluated and compared after 2 courses between 2 groups.The simplified McGill scale was used to determine the pain score of patients before and after treatment in both groups.Results The total effective rate of treatment group was better than that of control group;the difference had statistical significance(P0.05).The scores of McGill scale were improved in 2 groups and the data of treatment group were better than those of the controls;the differences had statistical significance(P 0.05).Conclusion The Zhuang Medical massage combined with fire needle therapy has good clinical curative effects on patients with lumbar intervertebral disc protrusion.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".