MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2472225496 · doi:10.1016/j.jcm.2016.04.001

Effect of TENS Versus Placebo on Walking Capacity in Patients With Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

2016· article· en· W2472225496 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Carlo Ammendolia, Pierre Côté, Y. Raja Rampersaud, Danielle Southerst, Brian Budgell, Claire Bombardier, Gillian Hawker

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Chiropractic Medicine · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalCanadian Memorial Chiropractic CollegeOntario Tech UniversityPublic Health OntarioUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
FundersArthritis Society
KeywordsMedicineChiropracticRandomized controlled trialLumbar spinal stenosisSpinal stenosisLumbarProtocol (science)PlaceboPhysical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationSurgeryAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is a growing health problem and a leading cause of disability and loss of independence in older adults. It is usually caused by age-related degenerative narrowing of the spinal canals leading to compression and ischemia of the spinal nerves and symptoms of neurogenic claudication. Limited walking ability is the dominant functional impairment caused by LSS. Animal studies suggest increased blood flow to the spinal nerves and spinal cord with superficial paraspinal electrical stimulation. The purpose of this study is to assess the effectiveness of paraspinal transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) applied while walking on walking ability in patients with LSS. METHODS/DESIGN: We propose to conduct a 2-arm double-blinded (participant and assessor) randomized controlled trial. We will recruit individuals who have limited walking ability due to degenerative LSS from hospital specialists, community physicians, and chiropractors located in the city of Toronto, Canada. Eligible consenting participants will be randomly assigned to either paraspinal TENS or placebo paraspinal TENS applied while walking. The primary outcome will be walking distance measured during a single self-paced walking test. We will calculate the differences in proportions among participants in both groups who achieve at least a 30% improvement in walking distance from baseline using Pearson χ (2) test with 95% confidence intervals. DISCUSSION: Effective nonoperative interventions for LSS are unknown. Interventions that can improve blood flow to the spinal nerves while walking may increase walking ability in this population. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation is a low-cost intervention that may have the potential to achieve this objective. To our knowledge, this study will be the first clinical trial to assess the effects of TENS on walking ability of patients with LSS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02592642.

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)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
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: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.179

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0060.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.007
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0100.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0530.007

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.318 · 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
GenreProtocol

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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Chiropractic MedicineSame topicSpine and Intervertebral Disc PathologyFrench-language works237,207