Acupuncture As A Promising Treatment For Below-Level Central Neuropathic Pain: A Retrospective Study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Below-level central neuropathic pain, a diffuse pain characterized by generalized burning, is commonly experienced by individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI). The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of an electroacupuncture protocol for the treatment of below-level central neuropathic pain developed at the Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, Lyndhurst Center, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. METHOD: Retrospective chart review. RESULTS: Thirty-six individuals with traumatic and nontraumatic SCI met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 24 showed improvement after treatment with the electroacupuncture protocol. Type of injury, level of injury, and duration of below-level central neuropathic pain was not correlated with improvement. However, individuals whose pain was described as bilateral (vs unilateral; P = 0.014) or symmetric (vs nonsymmetric; P = 0.026) were more likely to improve after acupuncture treatment. Overall, patients whose burning pain was bilateral, symmetric, and constant (P = 0.005) were the most likely to improve. CONCLUSION: This retrospective study suggests that the Lyndhurst Center Central Neuropathic Pain Acupuncture Protocol may be an effective treatment option for patients with SCI who are experiencing below-level central neuropathic pain. Additional prospective clinical studies are needed to confirm these findings.
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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it