MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2371557798

Effect of High-voltage Electrostatic Therapy on Chronic Migraine:a Randomized Controlled Observation

2012· article· en· W2371557798 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Zhu Shou-jua

Bibliographic record

VenueZhongguo kangfu lilun yu shijian · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMigraine and Headache Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMcGill Pain QuestionnaireRandomized controlled trialAnesthesiaMigrainePhysical therapyChronic painVisual analogue scaleInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To investigate the effect of high-voltage electrostatic therapy on chronic migraine.Methods 86 cases who met inclusion criteria were randomly divided into two groups: high-voltage group(n=43) was treated with high-voltage therapeutic device for 20 d.Control group(n=43) was blank control.The recovered cases were followed up for 4 weeks after cessation of treatment.They were assessed with McGill Pain Questionnaire(MPQ),and their results of laboratory tests were recorded before and after treatment.The data set analyzed included Intention-To-Treat,and per protocol.Results The differences between 2 groups were statistically significant in Pain Rating Index,Visual Analog Score and Present Pain Intensity after treatment(P0.05).6 patients in the treatment group and 1 patient in the control group recovered.During the 4-week follow-up,1 case recured in each group,the intensity of pain was not statistically significant.There was no difference in the laboratory indice of blood,urine,stool routine,liver and kidney function(ALT,BUN,Cr) and ECG in both groups before and after treatment.Conclusion The high-voltage electrostatic therapy is effective and safe on chronic migraine.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.275 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZhongguo kangfu lilun yu shijianSame topicMigraine and Headache StudiesFrench-language works237,207