MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3116343127 · doi:10.1097/brs.0000000000003898

The Effectiveness of Matrix Rhythm Therapy in Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain

2020· article· en· W3116343127 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nadir Tayfun Özcan, Bilge Başakçı Çalık, Elif Gür Kabul

Bibliographic record

VenueSpine · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMyofascial pain diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePhysical therapyLow back painQuality of life (healthcare)Oswestry Disability IndexRandomized controlled trialTranscutaneous electrical nerve stimulationMcGill Pain QuestionnaireIntervention (counseling)Back painInternal medicineVisual analogue scaleAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY DESIGN: Randomized clinical study. OBJECTIVE: Our study was planned to determine the effect of matrix rhythm therapy (MRT) on pain, level of disability, and quality of life in chronic low back pain. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Low back pain is a complex and heterogeneous disorder. Different therapy options can be applied in the treatment of low back pain. In the literature, there are very few studies showing the effect of MRT in patients with chronic low back pain. METHODS: A total of 32 participants with a mean age of 36.41 ± 8.91 years were randomly divided into two groups (intervention group and control group). Each participant was treated with ten sessions a combined physiotherapy program (hot pack, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, therapeutic ultrasound, home exercise and patient education program). Additionally, intervention group received six sessions of MRT. Pain (McGill Pain Questionnaire), level of disability (Oswestry Disability Index) and quality of life (Short Form-36) were measured before and after the treatment programme. RESULTS: When pre- and post-treatment results were compared in the intervention group, a statistically significant difference was found in total pain level, disability level, and all subdimensions except the "Emotional Role" subdimension of Short Form-36 (SF-36) and total SF-36 scores (P ≤ 0.05). In the control group, statistically significant differences were found in disability level, the "Vitality" and "Bodily Pain" subdimensions of SF-36 and total SF-36 scores (P ≤ 0.05). When the delta values were compared between groups, there was a statistically significant difference only in the "general health perceptions" subdimension of SF-36 (P ≤ 0.05) in favor of the intervention group. CONCLUSION: It was determined that both the combined physiotherapy program and the MRT application in addition to the combined physiotherapy program have a positive effect on pain, disability level, and quality of life in patients with chronic low back pain.Level of Evidence: 2.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpineSame topicMyofascial pain diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207