Immediate Effects of the Combination of Interferential Therapy Parameters on Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To compare the immediate analgesic effects of 2 kHz or 4 kHz interferential current (IFC) with different amplitude-modulated frequencies (AMFs) (2 Hz or 100 Hz) on chronic low back pain (CLBP). DESIGN: Three-arm double-blinded randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Primary care. PARTICIPANTS: 175 patients (19 to 60 years of age, 105 female) with CLBP. INTERVENTIONS: One session of IFC: Interferential group (GI): GI2 kHz/100 Hz, GI2 kHz/2 Hz, GI4 kHz/100 Hz, GI4 kHz/2 Hz, or placebo. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Pain intensity by numerical rating scale of pain (NRS), McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), and algometry. RESULTS: There was a significant difference in NRS scores (P < 0.05) in the GI2 kHz/2 Hz, GI4 kHz/2 Hz, and GI4 kHz/100 Hz groups compared with those of the placebo group (PG), and a significant difference in MPQ scores in the GI4 kHz/2 Hz and GI4 kHz/100 Hz groups compared with those of the PG. In algometry, only the GI4 kHz/100 Hz group showed a significant difference (by 2 points in the lumbar region) compared with the PG. Of the carrier frequencies, an IFC of 4 kHz showed more effective results, although no significant difference was noted between the AMFs. CONCLUSION: An IFC with a carrier frequency of 4 kHz and an AMF of 100 Hz provide immediate analgesic effects in individuals with CLBP. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: RBR-59YGRB.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".