MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3006993070 · doi:10.1016/j.imr.2020.02.002

Efficacy and safety of herbal medicine (Dangguijagyag-san) for primary dysmenorrhea: study protocol for a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multi-center trial

2020· article· en· W3006993070 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
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

VenueIntegrative Medicine Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMenstrual Health and Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKorea Health Industry Development Institute
KeywordsMedicineProtocol (science)PlaceboDouble blindRandomized controlled trialCenter (category theory)Traditional medicineInternal medicineAlternative medicinePathologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Dangguijagyag-san, also known as Dangguishaoyao-san in Chinese and Toki-shakuyakui-san in Japanese, has been frequently used to treat symptoms associated with dysmenorrhea. The purpose of this trial is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the herbal medicine, Dangguijagyag-san, relative to those of active control, Gamisoyo-san, and a placebo control for primary dysmenorrhea. METHODS: This protocol details a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, multi-center, investigator-initiated, controlled trial evaluating treatment of primary dysmenorrhea. Two hundred and forty participants will be randomly divided into one of three groups: 1) the Dangguijagyag-san experimental group (EG) (n = 105), 2) the Gamisoyo-san active control group (ACG) (n = 30), and 3) the placebo control group (PCG) (n = 105). The interventions will be administered for two menstrual cycles, and the follow-up will be carried out for the following six menstrual cycles. The primary outcomes are difference in response rates between the EG and the ACG (non-inferiority comparison) and difference in changes from baseline in average pain intensity measured by the visual analogue scale between the EG and PCG (superiority comparison). The secondary outcomes are pain scores derived from pain assessment tools (verbal multidimensional scoring system, retrospective symptom scale, and short form McGill pain questionnaire), dosage of analgesics, pattern diagnosis questionnaires, and short form 36 health survey. Adverse events and vital signs will be checked at every visit, and laboratory tests will be performed for safety evaluation. DISCUSSION: The results of this clinical trial will offer evidence for the efficacy and safety of Dangguijagyag-san for primary dysmenorrhea. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Research Information Service of Korea: KCT0003005.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.230
GPT teacher head0.513
Teacher spread0.283 · 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