MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3097003511 · doi:10.1093/pm/pnaa329

Green Light Exposure Improves Pain and Quality of Life in Fibromyalgia Patients: A Preliminary One-Way Crossover Clinical Trial

2020· article· en· W3097003511 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Laurent Martin, Frank Porreca, Elizabeth I Mata, Michelle Salloum, Vasudha Goel, Pooja Gunnala, Wiliam D S Killgore, Sejal V. Jain, Felesia N Jones-MacFarland, Rajesh Khanna, Amol Patwardhan, Mohab Ibrahim

Bibliographic record

VenuePain Medicine · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLaser Applications in Dentistry and Medicine
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Center for Complementary and Integrative HealthNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
KeywordsFibromyalgiaMedicineQuality of life (healthcare)Physical therapyMcGill Pain QuestionnaireCrossover studyClinical trialVisual analogue scaleChronic painRandomized controlled trialInternal medicineAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Fibromyalgia is a functional pain disorder in which patients suffer from widespread pain and poor quality of life. Fibromyalgia pain and its impact on quality of life are not effectively managed with current therapeutics. Previously, in a preclinical rat study, we demonstrated that exposure to green light-emitting diodes (GLED) for 8 hours/day for 5 days resulted in antinociception and reversal of thermal and mechanical hypersensitivity associated with models of injury-related pain. Given the safety of GLED and the ease of its use, our objective is to administer GLED as a potential therapy to patients with fibromyalgia. DESIGN: One-way crossover clinical trial. SETTING: United States. METHOD: We enrolled 21 adult patients with fibromyalgia recruited from the University of Arizona chronic pain clinic who were initially exposed to white light-emitting diodes and then were crossed over to GLED for 1 to 2 hours daily for 10 weeks. Data were collected by using paper surveys. RESULTS: When patients were exposed to GLED, but not white light-emitting diodes, they reported a significant reduction in average pain intensity on the 10-point numeric pain scale. Secondary outcomes were assessed by using the EQ-5D-5L survey, Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire, and Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire and were also significantly improved in patients exposed to GLED. GLED therapy was not associated with any measured side effects in these patients. CONCLUSION: Although the mechanism by which GLED elicits pain reduction is currently being studied, these results supporting its efficacy and safety merit a larger clinical trial.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 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

Citations60
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePain MedicineSame topicLaser Applications in Dentistry and MedicineFrench-language works237,207