MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A型肉毒毒素联合红外偏振光治疗带状疱疹后遗神经痛的临床观察

2012· article· zh· W3031626126 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
宋金辉, 丁旭东, 洪艳, 陈华先, 王汉, 吴冬云, 张贵斌

Bibliographic record

Venue中国医师杂志 · 2012
Typearticle
Languagezh
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

目的 观察A型肉毒毒素联合红外偏振光治疗带状疱疹后遗神经痛的临床疗效.方法 选取87例带状疱疹后神经痛患者,采用随机数字表法分为3组.红外偏振光治疗组(A组)运用红外偏振光治疗仪照射治疗带状疱疹后神经痛,肉毒素治疗组(B组)应用A型肉毒毒素进行疼痛点皮下注射治疗疱疹后神经痛,联合治疗组(C组)同时应用红外偏振光治疗仪照射患部和肉毒素疼痛点皮下注射治疗带状疱疹后神经痛,调查每例带状疱疹后神经痛患者治疗前3个月、治疗后1个月、治疗后3个月、治疗后6个月带状疱疹后神经痛发作情况,并行简式McGill疼痛问卷表及生活质量评价量表评分,比较带状疱疹后神经痛发作严重程度及其带状疱疹后神经痛恢复状况,观察不良反应.结果 A组、B组与C组治疗后1个月、治疗后3个月、治疗后6个月简式McGill疼痛问卷表评分显著低于治疗前评分(P<0.01),生活质量评价量表评分显著高于治疗前评分(P<0.01),差异均有统计学意义.C组在治疗后1个月、治疗后3个月、治疗后6个月,SF-MPQ及SF-36评分分别与A组、B组治疗后1个月、治疗后3个月、治疗后6个月相应评分比较差异有统计意义(P<0.01).结论 A型肉毒毒素疼痛点皮下注射联合红外偏振光治疗带状疱疹后神经痛发作临床疗效显著,不良反应轻微。

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.115

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.014
Scholarly communication0.0100.010
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.003

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.342 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue中国医师杂志Same topicMedical Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207