International Cross-Sectional Study on the Effectiveness of Okada Purifying Therapy, a Biofield Therapy, for the Relief of Various Symptoms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To investigate whether differences exist in the effectiveness/safety of a single session of Okada Purifying Therapy (OPT), a type of biofield therapy, among those from different ethnicity/cultures, and to analyze factors associated with the outcomes in a real-world setting. Design: Pre–post test design using convenience sampling methods. Setting: Home setting. Subjects: A total of 11,303 individuals aged 16 years or older from 14 different countries (>1000 individuals each from Japan, the United States, Thailand, Chile/Peru, and <200 individuals each from Portugal, Spain, Argentina, Mexico, Brazil, South Korea, Taiwan, Belgium, and France). More than 50% of the subjects were themselves OPT practitioners, and more than 50% of the treatments were administered in an environment where the practice of OPT was promoted. Intervention: Participants received a single session of OPT lasting 30 min or longer from the volunteer practitioners. They self-reported the changes in overall symptoms, physical pain, anxiety/depression, and dizziness/palpitation. Outcome measures: Improvement/exacerbation rates of each symptom and factors associated with symptom improvement were analyzed. Results: Of the participants, 77.5%, 75.6%, 78.4%, and 73.8% reported an improvement of overall symptoms, physical pain, anxiety/depression, and dizziness/palpitation, respectively. The improvement rates were consistently higher among participants from Chile/Peru than those from Japan, the United States, and Thailand (p < 0.001), and among those who had received a longer therapy (p < 0.001). Spanish/Portuguese speaking countries almost always showed high improvement rates; conversely, Japan showed a lower rate in each symptom. Participants' gender, reasons for participation, previous experience, and location of the session were also associated with the improvement of different symptoms. These findings occurred regardless of the participants' age or presence/absence of illness. In terms of safety, the exacerbation rates of symptoms were 2.8%, 2.5%, 0.8%, and 1.7%, respectively. Of those who expressed symptoms exacerbation, 71.6% recovered in a few hours. None of them needed emergency medical treatment. Conclusions: In those who were often sympathetic to OPT and/or in an authorized location, OPT was effective and safe across countries with ethnic/cultural differences; however, participants' country of residence and duration of the session were independently associated with the changes in various symptoms. (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03994809).
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".