Acupressure bands do not improve chemotherapy‐induced nausea control in pediatric patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy: A single‐blinded, randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting remain common, distressing side effects of chemotherapy. It has been reported that acupressure prevents chemotherapy-induced nausea in adults, but it has not been well studied in children. METHODS: In this multicenter, prospective, randomized, single-blind, sham-controlled trial, the authors compared acute-phase nausea severity in patients ages 4 to 18 years who were receiving highly emetic chemotherapy using standard antiemetic agents combined with acupressure wrist bands, the most common type of acupressure, versus sham bands. Patients wore acupressure or sham bands continuously on each day of chemotherapy and for up to 7 days afterward. Chemotherapy-induced nausea severity in the delayed phase and chemotherapy-induced vomiting control in the acute and delayed phases also were compared. RESULTS: Of the 187 patients randomized, 165 contributed nausea severity assessments during the acute phase. Acupressure bands did not reduce the severity of chemotherapy-induced nausea in the acute phase (odds ratio [OR], 1.33; 95% confidence limits, 0.89-2.00, in which an OR <1.00 favored acupressure) or in the delayed phase (OR, 1.23; 95% CL, 0.75-2.01). Furthermore, acupressure bands did not improve daily vomiting control during the acute phase (OR, 1.57; 95% CL, 0.95-2.59) or the delayed phase (OR, 0.84; 95% CL, 0.45-1.58). No serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Acupressure bands were safe but did not improve chemotherapy-induced nausea or vomiting in pediatric patients who were receiving highly emetic chemotherapy. Cancer 2018;124:1188-96. © 2017 American Cancer Society.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".