MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2408616506

[Clinical study of cervical spondylotic radiculopathy treated with massage therapy combined with Magnetic sticking therapy at the auricular points and the cost comparison].

2015· article· en· W2408616506 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Saina Wang, Pan Yunhua, Feng Xu, Zhichao Wang, Lei Cheng

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical and Thoracic Myelopathy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMassageMedicineCervical spondylosisPhysical therapyManual therapySurgery
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical efficacy on cervical spondylotic radiculopathy between the combined therapy of massage and magnetic-sticking at the auricular points and the simple massage therapy, and conduct the health economics evaluation. METHODS: Seventy-two patients of cervical spondylotic radiculopathy were randomized into a combined therapy group, and a simple massage group, 36 cases in each one. Finally, 35 cases and 34 cases were met the inclusive criteria in the corresponding groups separately. In the combined therapy group, the massage therapy and the magnetic sticking therapy at auricular points were combined in the treatment. Massage therapy was mainly applied to Fengchi (GB 20), Jianjing (GB 21), Jianwaishu (SI 14), Jianyu (LI 15) and Quchi (LI 11). The main auricular points for magnetic sticking pressure were Jingzhui (AH13), Gan (On12) Shen (CO10), Shenmen (TF4), Pizhixia (AT4). In the simple massage group, the simple massage therapy was given, the massage parts and methods were the same as those in the combined therapy group. The treatment was given once every two days, three times a week, for 4 weeks totally. The cervical spondylosis effect scale and the simplified McGill pain questionnaire were adopted to observe the improvements in the clinical symptoms, clinical examination, daily life movement, superficial muscular pain in the neck and the health economics cost in the patients of the two groups. The effect was evaluated in the two groups. RESULTS: The effective rate and the clinical curative rate in the combined therapy group were better than those in the control group [100. 0% (35/35) vs 85. 3% (29/34), 42. 9% (15/35) vs 17. 6% (6/34), both P<0. 05]. The scores of the spontaneous symptoms, clinical examnation, daily life movement and superficialmuscular pain in the neck were improved apparently after treatment as compared with those before treatment in the patients of the two groups (all P<0. 001). In terms of the improvements in the spontaneous symptoms, clinical examination total scores and superficial muscular pain in the' neck were more significant in the combined therapy group as compared with those in the simple massage group (P<0. 05, P<0. 01, P<0. 001). The cost at the unit effect in the combined therapy group was lower than that in the simple massage group (P<0. 05). CONCLUSION: Compared with the simple massage therapy, the massage therapy combined with magnetic sticking therapy at auricular points achieves the better effect and lower cost in health economics.

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)0.003
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicCervical and Thoracic MyelopathyFrench-language works237,207