Assessment of the Therapeutic Effect of Simultaneous Traction and Acupuncture on Cervical Spondylotic Vertebral Arteriopathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To assess the therapeutic effect of simultaneous traction and acupuncture on cervical spondylotic vertebral arteriopathy by post-treatment rehabilitation evaluation and comparison with conventional acupuncture.Methods Sixty-six patients with cervical spondylotic vertebral arteriopathy were randomly allocated to two groups.The trial group received simultaneous traction and acupuncture and the control group,nonsimultaneous traction and acupuncture.The therapeutic effects were evaluated using the Simplified McGill Pain Questionnaire and the Visual Analog Scale.Results Treatment was completed in the 29 patients of the trial group and the 35 patients of the control group.Statistical analysis showed that there was a statistically significant pre-/post-treatment difference in the Simplified McGill Pain Questionnaire score in both groups.The Simplified McGill Pain Questionnaire score decreased more and the time to produce an effect was shorter in the trial group than in the control group.Conclusions Both traction plus acupuncture protocols have a very marked therapeutic effect on cervical spondylotic vertebral arteriopathy.Simultaneous traction and acupuncture is slightly superior to conventional acupuncture in relieving neck,shoulder and arm pains.The time for simultaneous traction and acupuncture to produce an effect is shorter than the time for conventional acupuncture to do it.Simultaneous traction and acupuncture shorten the time for one session of treatment and greatly increase therapeutic efficiency.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".