MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

[Discussion on "dry needling" being part of acupuncture].

2017· article· en· W2747466705 on OpenAlexaff
Zengfu Peng, Nenggui Xu, Zhaoxiang Bian, Canhui Li, Weidong Lu, Tao Huang, Shaobai Wang

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMyofascial pain diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsHumber Polytechnic
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDry needlingAcupunctureMedicineMeridian (astronomy)Acupuncture pointAcupuncture therapyTraditional medicineAcupuncture needlePhysical therapyAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We think that all the methods of puncturing into the skin to prevent and treat diseases are belong to acupuncture science. In spite of its basic theory of meridian and acupoint, anatomy and physiology have been important parts of modern acupuncture science. "Dry needling", however, is limited to trigger point theory. As for the positions, acupuncture is applied mainly at acupoints, involving in skin, muscles, tendons, vessels and nerves; while "dry needling" is used mostly at muscles. The needles of acupuncture are in various lengths and diameters and its manipulations are abundant, including the traditional skills and the achievements of modern science and technology research, such as electroacupuncture. It is different from the "dry needling" with the single tool and manipulation. Thus, acupuncture is suitable for a large range of syndromes, but "dry needling" is mainly for fascia muscularis pain and other related disorders. The acupuncturists need to embrace Chinese and western medicine, which is more rigorous than the training for "dry needling" practitioners. Based on the above reasons, we consider "dry needling" as part of acupuncture science, and it is a method during the modern development of traditional acupuncture.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0080.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.004

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicMyofascial pain diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207