Investigation and Analysis of the Key Objectives of WFAS “Technical Specifications of Acupuncture and Moxibustion: General Rules for the Drafting”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the key objectives of WFAS "Technical Specifications of Acupuncture and Moxibustion: General Rules for the Drafting" (hereinafter referred to as General Rules). METHODS: From the medical institutions, colleges, and scientific research organizations at major levels in China and overseas, leading researchers and experts in the field of acupuncture-moxibustion standardization, as well as some experienced foreign specialists in acupuncture-moxibustion, were selected as the respondents. The questionnaire was prepared by using the website of Questionnaire Star, and 60 links of the questionnaire were sent out through e-mail. Excel was used to set up the database and conduct statistical analysis. RESULTS: Fifty-one valid questionnaires were collected with effective recovery rate of 85%, involving 9 countries (China, South Korea, Italy, Spain, Sweden, Norway, Netherlands, United States, and Canada) from 3 continents. Most experts agreed with us on the target people, structural elements, and text structure proposed in General Rules and held that the General Rules should emphasize the safety and international applicability and should stipulate in details the common problems (contraindications, indications, taboo crowd, target people, therapeutic effects) of various techniques and the specific contents of technical operation (manipulating techniques, selection of patient's body position and treated areas, disinfection and environmental requirements, selection of acupuncture-moxibustion instruments, cautions, needle retention time, treatment frequency, precise location of the acupoints, treatment course) in order to enhance the practicality and operability. CONCLUSION: The key objectives of General Rules mainly include target people, structural elements, text structure, safety requirements, common technical problems of acupuncture-moxibustion, and specific details of technical manipulations.
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 | 0.049 | 0.095 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".