Acupuncture for voice problems: anti-inflammatory or stress reduction effect?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Treatment options for functional dyspepsia (FD) refractory to pharmacological treatments are limited but the effectiveness of electroacupuncture (EA) is uncertain.We assessed the effectiveness of EA combined with on-demand gastrocaine.Methods: We conducted a single-center, assessor-blind, randomized parallel-group 2-arm trial on Helicobacter pylori negative FD patients of the postprandial distress syndrome subtype refractory to proton pump inhibitor, prokinetics, or H2 antagonists.Enrolled participants were block randomized in a 1:1 ratio, with concealed random sequence.The treatment and control groups both received on-demand gastrocaine for 12 weeks, but only those in treatment group were offered 20 sessions of EA over 10 weeks.The primary endpoint was the between-group difference in proportion of patients achieving adequate relief of symptoms at week 12. Results: Of 132 participants randomly assigned to EA plus ondemand gastrocaine (n = 66) or on-demand gastrocaine alone (n = 66), 125 (94.7%) completed all follow-up at 12 weeks.The EA group had a compliance rate 97.7%.They had a significantly higher likelihood in achieving adequate symptom relief at 12 weeks, with a clinically relevant number needed to treat (NNT) value of 2.36 (95% CI: 1.74, 3.64).Among secondary outcomes, statistically and clinically significant improvements were observed among global symptom (NNT = 3.85 [95% CI: 2.63, 7.69]); postprandial fullness and early satiation (NNT = 5.00 [95% CI: 2.86, 25.00]); as well as epigastric pain, epigastric burning, and postprandial nausea (NNT = 4.17 [95% CI: 2.56, 11.11]).Adverse events were minimal and nonsignificant.Conclusion: For refractory FD, EA provides significant, clinically relevant symptom relief when added to on-demand gastrocaine.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 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".