Effect of a Bioenergy Economy Program on the Severity of Symptoms and Quality of Life of Patients With Myofascial Pain Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of a bioenergy economy-based program on the intensity of symptoms and quality of life among patients with myofascial pain syndrome. To collect the data, a simple random sampling was used among the women patients with MPS referred from a neurological clinic in Mashhad. Fifteen patients were collected as an experimental group. The method consisted of a quasiexperimental method with a pre-test, post-test, and follow-ups in two and six months after the program. Data collection main materials included the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ) and WHO Quality of Life -BREF Questionnaire (WHOQOL-BREF). Moreover, Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) and the Beck Anxiety Inventory were used to increase the quality of the research. The group underwent six sessions of bioenergy economy-based program. Data collected were analyzed using repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) to reach the aim of the study. The mean score of pain intensity and depression had a significant difference in the post-test and the two follow-ups with the pre-test. The mean score of the anxiety had a significant difference in the pre-test and post-test but not in the follow-ups. The mean score of quality of life did not have a significant difference in the pre-test, post-test, and follow-ups even in the sub-scales, but the mean score of the post-test and the follow-ups were higher than the pre-test. Bioenergy economy-based program caused a significant decrease in the pain intensity, depression, and anxiety in women patients with MPS and remained consistent in the two and six month’s follow-ups. Even in the quality of life, there was an improvement after the program, and although the fluctuation in the score, the mean score after six months was lower than before the program. To conclude, a bioenergy economy-based program can be an effective program in lowering the pain, depression, and anxiety and improving the quality of life in women patients with myofascial pain syndrome, and this remains consistent in the following six months. © 2019 Tehran University of Medical Sciences. All rights reserved.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".