MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2953716727 · doi:10.5114/hm.2019.83998

Comparative effects of clinic- and virtual reality-based McKenzie extension therapy in chronic non-specific low-back pain

2019· article· en· W2953716727 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Movement · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsMedicineExtension (predicate logic)Virtual realityMovement (music)Physical therapyArtArtificial intelligenceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The study compared the influence of Clinic-Based McKenzie Therapy (CBMT) and a Virtual Reality Game (VRG) version on pain intensity, back extensor muscles endurance, activity limitation, participation restriction, fear avoidance belief, kinesiophobia, and general health status of patients with chronic non-specific low-back pain. Methods This quasi-experimental study involved 46 patients (CBMT: <i>n</i> = 24; VRG: <i>n</i> = 22) with ‘directional preference’ for extension, randomized into CBMT or VRG group. Treatment was applied thrice weekly for 8 weeks. Outcomes were assessed at the end of the 4<sup>th</sup> and 8<sup>th</sup> week. Data analysis employed descriptive and inferential statistics of independent t-test, Mann-Whitney U test, repeated measure ANOVA, Friedman’s ANOVA, and ANCOVA. The significance level was set as α = 0.05. Results There were no significant differences in the treatment outcomes (mean change) across the groups (<i>p</i> > 0.05), except for kinesiophobia, where VRG led to a significantly higher decline in mean rank at week 4 (28.3 vs. 19.1; <i>p</i> = 0.018) and 8 (28.7 vs. 18.7; <i>p</i> = 0.009), and vitality (a general health status item) at week 4 (27.6 vs. 19.8; <i>p</i> = 0.042) and 8 (28.1 vs. 19.3; <i>p</i> = 0.042). ANCOVA showed that significant baseline parameters were not significant predictors of vitality (F = 1.986; <i>p</i> = 0.070) or kinesiophobia (F = 0.866; <i>p</i> = 0.563) outcomes. Conclusions The VRG mode of McKenzie therapy is comparable with the clinic-based approach in most outcomes. VRG has a superior effect on kinesiophobia, but may take a higher toll on vitality/energy.

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.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.960
Threshold uncertainty score0.465

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.295 · 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