Controlled randomized trial on therapeutic effects of acupotomy-injection combined with Feng's spinal manipulation(FSM) for cervical spondylotic radiculopathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective:To evaluate the therapeutic effects of acupotomy-injection with FENG Tian-you spinal manipulation(FSM) for treating cervical spondylotic radiculopathy(CSR). Methods:Seventy-two patients with CSR were randomly divided into two groups(n=36 respectively):treatment and control group. The patients in treatment group were treated with acupotomy-injection combined with FSM,and patients in control group were treated with traction. All the patients were followed up for 3 months after treatment and the therapeutic effects were evaluated. Results:Totally there were 72 patients and 69 completed the treatment and the other 3 patients withdraw from treatment. In treatment group,24 patients were cured,6 patients had remarkable effects,4 effective and 2 ineffective;as well in control group,above data were 15,3,10 and 8 respectively. The comprehensive effects and the cured patients in the treatment group were obviously better than those of control group(P0.05). The comparison of scales for assessment of symptoms and short-form McGill Pain Questionaire before and after treatment in two groups had significant differences(P0.001). Conclusion:The method of acupotomy-injection combined with FSM for treating CSR is better than conventional traction method.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".