MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2605955216 · doi:10.2147/jpr.s129313

The efficacy of a preparatory phase of a touch-based approach in treating chronic low back pain: a randomized controlled trial

2017· article· en· W2605955216 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Federico Zangrando, Giulia Piccinini, Clara Tagliolini, Gabriella Marsilli, Marco Iosa, Maria Chiara Vulpiani, Teresa Paolucci

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pain Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMassageMedicinePhysical therapyMcGill Pain QuestionnaireVisual analogue scaleQuality of life (healthcare)Randomized controlled trialChronic painPhysical medicine and rehabilitationInternal medicineAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Massage therapy is an important element of rehabilitation in the treatment of chronic low back pain (CLBP). The objective of this study was to determine the relative efficacy of massage therapy between traditional massage and a new massage approach for CLBP. We also examined whether any reduction in pain was linked to interoceptive awareness and parasympathetic activation. Methods: A single-blind, randomized, controlled trial of 51 patients who were allocated into a traditional massage therapy group (TMG; N=24, mean age: 50.54±9.13 years) or experimental massage therapy group (SMG; N=27, mean age: 50.77±6.80 years). The primary outcome was the reduction in pain per the visual analog scale (VAS); the secondary outcome measures were multidimensional pain intensity on the McGill Pain Questionnaire, pain-related disability per the Waddel Disability Index, interoceptive awareness per the Multidimensional Assessment of Interoceptive Awareness Questionnaire, quality of life per the Short Form - 12 Health Survey, and heart rate variability, expressed as the coherence ratio (CR) by photoplethysmography. The following outcome measures were assessed at baseline, at the end of the treatment program, and at the 3-month follow-up. The mean and standard deviation were calculated for continuous data. Mann–Whitney U test was used to perform between-group comparisons, Friedman’s analysis was used for data on the 3 assessment times in each group, and Spearman’s R coefficient was used to analyze correlations. Results: Both approaches had a positive result on pain, an effect that was more acute in the SMG versus TMG for all pain scales, with better maintenance at the 3-month follow-up (VAS p =0.005 and p =0.098; Waddell Index p =0.034 and 0.044; McGill total p =0.000 and 0.003). In the SMG, CR scores were significant at baseline and at the end of the treatment program ( p =0.000 and 0.002). Conclusion: The new massage approach with a preparatory phase that is pleasant to the touch was more effective than the traditional approach for CLBP. Keywords: perception, rehabilitation, quality of life, pain memory, massage

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.101
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.094
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.925

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1010.094
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.430
Teacher spread0.376 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations18
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pain ResearchSame topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationFrench-language works237,207