MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2810968187 · doi:10.5507/ag.2018.010

Effect of locally applied vibration on pain reduction in patients with chronic low back pain: A pilot study

2018· article· en· W2810968187 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hana Bednáříková, David Smékal, Pavlína Krejčiříková, Ivana Hanzlíková

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Gymnica · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEffects of Vibration on Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineChronic painReduction (mathematics)Low back painPhysical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationAlternative medicineMathematicsPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Locally applied vibration has been recently proposed as a treatment for pain relief. Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the effect of specific vibration therapy using the Redcord Stimula device on reduction of pain in patients with chronic low back pain. Methods: The study included 14 subjects aged 16-59 years. Pain was assessed at the baseline and after the therapy using the Short Form McGill Pain Questionnaire as well as with Oswestry Disability Index, pressure pain thresholds were recorded by a mechanical algometer. All subjects received 8 therapy sessions, each session consisting of 7 proprioceptive exercises adapted for use in the Redcord suspension system with the Redcord Stimula device. Results: After completing the therapy, a statistically significant reduction in the pain score was recorded in both questionnaires. The average values decreased by 8.8% (p = .001) in the Short Form McGill Pain Questionnaire and by 7.6% (p = .001) in the Oswestry Disability Index. Pain thresholds measured by an algometer showed statistically significant increase in 3 of 5 measured sites. Conclusions: The results of the study suggest that locally applied vibration may be a viable option for treatment of chronic pain.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.492
Threshold uncertainty score0.630

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa GymnicaSame topicEffects of Vibration on HealthFrench-language works237,207