The Japanese Version of the Massachusetts General Hospital Acupuncture Sensation Scale: A Validation Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Acupuncture sensations are considered essential in producing the treatment effect of acupuncture. The Massachusetts General Hospital Acupuncture Sensation Scale (MASS) is a frequently used scale in acupuncture research to measure acupuncture sensations. We translated the MASS into Japanese (Japanese MASS) based on Beaton's guidelines. 30 acupuncturists evaluated the relevancy and meaning of the 12 descriptors included in the Japanese MASS. The content validity ratios for 10 of the 12 descriptors were 0.33 or greater. 42 healthy subjects then evaluated acupuncture sensations evoked by manual acupuncture at LI4 using the Japanese MASS. Cronbach's alpha was 0.86. The correlation coefficient of total MASS scores and total Short Form McGill Pain Questionnaire scores and MASS indices and sensory visual analogue scores were 0.78 and 0.80, respectively. Factor analysis loaded the 12 descriptors onto two meaningful factors. This study demonstrated that the Japanese MASS has good reliability, content validity, criterion-related validity, and construct validity. Therefore, the Japanese MASS is a valid and reliable instrument for use with Japanese populations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".