Acupuncture as Adjuvant Therapy for the Management of Cervical Dystonia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: There are no curative treatments for cervical dystonia (CD), therefore conventional management is aimed at pain relief and muscle relaxation. Many patients with CD use complementary and integrative medicine interventions to manage symptoms, yet there are limited data on the use of acupuncture for CD. The aim of the current study was to determine the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of adjuvant acupuncture. Materials and Methods: A pilot open-label study was conducted on acupuncture treatments as add-on therapy to botulinum-toxin injection sessions (3 months apart) in 5 subjects with chronic idiopathic CD. Six 1-hour acupuncture sessions were administered every other week over the 3-month period between consecutive botulinum-toxin sessions. Data from exploratory efficacy endpoints—including a visual analogue scale for pain, the Clinician Global Impression of Change, the Patient Global Impression of Change, the Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale, and the Short Form–36) Health Survey—were collected. Results: Five subjects completed the study with only 1 acupuncture session missed by 1 subject, thereby meeting the study's predetermined adherence goal. All participants reported improvement from acupuncture. Only minor adverse events were reported, with self-resolved discomfort in 1 subject and self-resolved minor bruising in 2 subjects. Conclusions: Acupuncture is feasible and safe as an adjunct treatment for chronic CD, and might be associated with subjective symptomatic benefits.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".