Who Uses Osteopathic Manipulative Treatment? A Prospective, Observational Study Conducted by DO-Touch.NET
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: Information about the characteristics of patients who use osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) is limited. OBJECTIVE: To determine the scope of conditions being managed with OMT and describe the characteristics of patients who receive OMT. METHODS: Researchers conducted a longitudinal, observational study on the use and effectiveness of OMT at 17 clinics where clinicians (ie, osteopathic and allopathic physicians and Canadian-trained osteopaths) provided OMT. Adult patients receiving OMT completed questionnaires immediately before, immediately after, and daily for 7 days after treatment. Data collected from patients included demographic information, chief complaint(s) and their severity, and health-related quality of life. Physical examination findings, treatment, and medical diagnosis documentation were extracted from medical records. Census data were used to assess whether patients were representative of the population of the county where the clinic was located. RESULTS: Data were collected from 927 patients at 1924 office visits. A majority of patients were women (690 [75%]), white (854 [96%]), and not Hispanic or Latinx (707 [95%]). The mean (SD) age was 51.9 (15.9) years. When compared with census data, the sample had higher percentages of women, people aged 65 years and older, people who identified as white, people who were high school and college graduates, and people with higher household incomes than that of the county population. The most common chief complaints from patients were pain or discomfort in the lower back (311 [34%]) and neck (277 [30%]), which corresponded with the most common medical diagnoses. Patients reported that OMT, surgery, and medications were the most helpful treatments they had used previously for their chief complaint(s). Before receiving OMT, patients' health-related quality of life was significantly worse (P≤.05) than that of the general US population. CONCLUSIONS: Adult patients receiving OMT are being treated primarily for musculoskeletal pain conditions, are not representative of the population of the county where the clinic was located, and have worse health-related quality of life than that of the general population. Information about the characteristics of patients who use OMT is important for defining osteopathic distinctiveness and identifying potential areas for increasing the use of OMT. (ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT02395965).
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".