MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3164912507 · doi:10.1177/09645284211009542

Acupuncture for post-stroke cognitive impairment: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021· review· en· W3164912507 on OpenAlex
Xu Kuang, Wenjuan Fan, Jiawei Hu, Liqun Wu, Wei Yi, Liming Lu, Nenggui Xu

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAcupuncture in Medicine · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcupuncture Treatment Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMontreal Cognitive AssessmentMedicineAcupunctureCochrane LibraryMeta-analysisPhysical therapyRandomized controlled trialSubgroup analysisMEDLINEConfidence intervalCognitionStrictly standardized mean differenceStroke (engine)Grading (engineering)Cognitive impairmentMini–Mental State ExaminationInternal medicineAlternative medicinePsychiatryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of acupuncture for the treatment of post-stroke cognitive impairment (PSCI). Methods: The Cochrane Library, Embase, Medline, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Science and Technology Periodical (VIP), Wanfang, and Chinese Biological Medicine (CBM) databases were electronically searched from their inception to 10 April 2019. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) scale and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) scale were used as outcomes to assess effectiveness with respect to cognitive function. Assessment of risk of bias (ROB) and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) assessment were performed by two reviewers independently. Data were analyzed using Review Manager (RevMan) 5.3. Results: A total of 28 trials with 2144 participants were included in the qualitative synthesis and meta-analysis. Four of the 28 trials (14%) were assessed as being at overall low ROB, 24 of the 28 trials (86%) were assessed as having overall high ROB. The quality of evidence for both MoCA and MMSE were deemed to be very low by the GRADE criteria. Results indicated that acupuncture groups may be benefiting more than non-acupuncture groups with respect to variation of MoCA scores (merged mean difference (MMD): 2.66, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.18 to 3.13, p < 0.00001; heterogeneity: χ 2 = 35.52, p = 0.0007, I 2 = 63%), and the heterogeneity decreased in both subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis. In addition, acupuncture groups might be benefiting more than non-acupuncture groups in terms of changes in MMSE score (MMD = 2.97, 95% CI = 2.13 to 3.80, p < 0.00001; heterogeneity: χ 2 = 269.75; p < 0.00001; I 2 = 92%), and the heterogeneity decreased in subgroup analysis. Only one RCT addressed adverse events, and the symptoms were mild and did not affect treatment and evaluation. Conclusion: Acupuncture could be effective and safe for PSCI. Nevertheless, the results should be interpreted cautiously due to the high ROB of included trials and very low quality of evidence for assessed outcomes.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.475
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0580.011
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.338 · 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