MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3090753947 · doi:10.1186/s13063-020-04720-5

Manual acupuncture versus sham acupuncture and usual care for the prevention of primary dysmenorrhea (PD): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

2020· article· en· W3090753947 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lingling Yu, Shiqin Liu, Wenhua Liu, Hua Wang, Feng-Xia Liang, Wei Lu, Shabei Xu, Wei Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueTrials · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMenstrual Health and Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHubei UniversityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMedicineAcupunctureProtocol (science)Randomized controlled trialAlternative medicinePhysical therapyResearch designInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Primary dysmenorrhea (PD) is a leading cause of dysmenorrhea among adolescent girls. Manual acupuncture may be considered as an effective treatment for PD, but high-quality evidence remains limited. This trial aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of acupuncture for the prevention of PD as compared with sham acupuncture and usual care. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a three-arm, randomized, controlled clinical trial in which the patients, assessors, and statisticians will be blinded. A total of 300 acupuncture-naive patients who were diagnosed as PD will be randomly allocated to the verum acupuncture, sham acupuncture, or usual care groups in a 2:2:1 ratio. Patients in the verum acupuncture group will receive manual acupuncture at specific acupuncture points with penetrating needling, while those in the sham acupuncture group will receive non-penetrating needling at non-acupuncture points. They will be given five sessions over a menstrual cycle for 3 menstrual cycles. Patients in the usual care group will receive health education and informed to receive manual acupuncture for free after waiting for 7 menstrual cycles. The primary outcome will be the change from baseline in the Cox Menstrual Symptom Scale Score (CMSS). The secondary outcomes will be the changes in Massachusetts General Hospital Acupuncture Sensation Scale (MASS), visual analog scale (VAS), Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire 2 (SF-MPQ-2), Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), Beck Depression Inventory II (BDI- II), Acupuncture Expectancy Scale (AES), 60-item NEO Personality Inventory-Short Form (NEO-FFI), and acute medication intake. The adverse events will be recorded at every visit. The analyses will be performed base on a full analysis set (FAS) and a per-protocol set (PPS). DISCUSSION: This study may provide high-quality evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of manual acupuncture for PD. In addition, the results of this study will help to identify the efficacy of acupuncture due to the specific effects of acupuncture or placebo effects of acupuncture ritual. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials.gov NCT02783534 . Registered on 26 May 2016.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
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 score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.145
GPT teacher head0.476
Teacher spread0.331 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrialsSame topicMenstrual Health and DisordersFrench-language works237,207