Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To evaluate the clinical efficacy of new fasciology-based Yijin therapy in treating thoracic facet joint disorders(TFJD).Methods A total of 80 TFJD patients were averagely randomized into treatment group and control group.Forty patients in the treatment group was treated with new Yijin therapy,and another 40 patients in the control group were treated with traditional acupuncture.Vasual analog scale(VAS),behavioral rating scale-6(BRS-6),and McGill pain scale were employed to evaluate the patients' condition in both groups before and after treatment,and the clinical efficacy was observed and compared between the two groups.Results After treatment,the scores of VAS,BRS-6,and McGill pain scale were significantly lower in the treatment group than those in the control group(P0.01),with their differences of scores between pretreatment and posttreatment being significantly higher than those in the control group(P0.01);and the cure rate and the total response rate in the treatment group were significantly higher than those in the control group(P0.01).Conclusion The new Yijin therapy is a new and effective method for TFJD.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".