Pilot study of acupuncture to treat anxiety in children and adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: This pilot study investigated the use of acupuncture in the treatment of paediatric anxiety. METHODS: Children with anxiety, aged 8-16, were randomised to either the acupuncture or waitlist control groups. Anxiety was measured using the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) for children and adolescents with generalised anxiety disorder and Multidimensional Anxiety Scale for Children 2nd Edition (MASC-2) self-rated and parent-rated forms. RESULTS: Twenty participants were enrolled in the study and 19 completed all the questionnaires to be included in the analysis. There were no differences in socio-demographic characteristics at baseline between the two groups. At the second assessment, the mean MASC-parent score for the acupuncture group was significantly lower than the waitlist group (65.6 (SD 15.0) compared to 81.0 (SD 11.9), P = 0.025) with an effect size = 1.13. The pre- and post-treatment comparisons were also significantly lower for both groups in the anxiety measures. In the acupuncture group, MASC-parent (P = 0.008, effect size 0.75) and the HAM-A (P < 0.001, effect size 1.4). In the waitlist group, MASC-self (P = 0.022; effect size 0.4), MASC-parent (P = 0.048; effect size 0.75) and HAM-A (P = 0.007; effect size 1.21). CONCLUSIONS: This study provided promising results on the potential use of acupuncture to treat children and adolescents with general anxiety. Future research using a randomised control trial with a sufficient sample size to control for confounders and sham (placebo) comparators is warranted.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".