MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3016776687 · doi:10.2196/14807

Comparative Study of Postural Garment Versus Exercises for Patients With Nonspecific Cervical Pain: Protocol for a Randomized Crossover Trial

2020· article· en· W3016776687 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mercè Avellanet, Anna Boada-Pladellorens, Jean-Claude Perrot, Laura Loro, Lidia Rodrigo Cansado, David Monterde, Josep Romagosa, Elvira Gea

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrossover studyPhysical therapyRandomized controlled trialProtocol (science)MedicineCrossoverPhysical medicine and rehabilitationAlternative medicineComputer scienceSurgeryPlaceboArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: There is a high prevalence of work-related musculoskeletal disorders among health care professionals. Posture is an essential point to be addressed for health care professionals with musculoskeletal disorders. Cervical pain can result from several conditions. Treatment should include posture modification and home exercise. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to compare a new postural garment (Posture Plus Force; Medi, Bayreuth, Germany) with exercises for women with nonspecific cervical pain. The investigators focus on nurses and allied health professionals due to the importance of posture in work-related musculoskeletal disorders. METHODS: This randomized crossover clinical trial has a 3-month treatment sequence and a 3-month washout period. Participants will include nurses and allied health professionals 21 to 55 years of age with cervical pain. Participants are allocated at random to two intervention groups: a postural garment (Posture Plus Force) to be worn for 2 to 4 hours per day for 90 days (P+ group) and five physiotherapy sessions (20 minutes each) to learn stretching and strengthening exercises with instructions to continue at home on a daily basis for 90 days (Ex group). The participants in each group will crossover interventions after a 3-month washout period. The primary outcomes are postural control and pain intensity. A static posturography will be performed with a scan (SpinalMouse; Idiag AG, Fehraltorf, Switzerland). The visual analogue scale is a psychometric measuring instrument designed to document cervical pain severity in individual participants. The secondary outcomes are cervical pain-related disability, catastrophizing, the global perceived effect of treatment, and the evaluation of garment comfort. Physical activity is assessed with the International Physical Activity Questionnaire. Assessment of primary and secondary outcomes is performed at T0 (pre-intervention), T1 (immediately after garment fitting for P+ group), T30, T60, and T90. The same measurements are recorded after the washout period and during the second intervention following the same sequence. All patients are provided with a logbook for compliance recording, over the counter drug use, pain evaluation, and sick leave. Statistical analysis is conducted following intention-to-treat principles and the treatment effects calculated using linear mixed models. RESULTS: The study design has been approved by the Ethics Commission of Hospital N Sra de Meritxell, Andorra in March 2017. A total of 32 participants are already enrolled in the study. An extension of the study is planned in a Spanish university hospital to achieve a larger sample. Study results are expected to be published during 2020. CONCLUSIONS: The Postural garment is expected to improve cervical pain by enhancing posture. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03560492; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03560492. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/14807.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.197

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0070.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.006
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0080.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0590.009

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 head0.270
GPT teacher head0.556
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation→French-language works237,207→