Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation effects on pain-intensity and endogenous opioids levels among chronic low-back pain patients: A randomised controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is a promising non-pharmacological modality for the management of chronic low back pain (CLBP), but its efficacy and mode of action have not been clearly established. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the responses of plasma beta-endorphin (βE), met-enkephalin (ME), and pain intensity (PI) among patients with CLBP exposed to TENS or sham-TENS. METHODS: This double-blind trial involved 62 participants (aged 53.29 ± 5.07 years) randomised into TENS group (frequency 100 Hz, burst-rate 2 Hz, burst-width 150 μs, intensity 40 mA, duration 30 min), and sham-TENS group. The PI and plasma concentrations of βE and ME were measured at baseline, immediately (0 hr), 1 hr, 24 hrs, and 48 hrs post-intervention. Data were analysed using general linear model repeated measures, ordinal regression, one-way analysis of variance, Kruskal-Wallis test, independent and paired samples t-tests, Mann-Whitney U test, Wilcoxon signed-rank test, and Kendall's tau coefficient. RESULTS: There was a significant temporal difference in PI between groups, F (1, 58) = 18.83, p< 0.001; the TENS group had better pain relief. The relative analgesic effect of TENS started immediately after the intervention (median difference [MD] =-3, p< 0.001), peaked at 1 hr (MD=-4, p< 0.001), and worn out by 24 hrs (MD=-1, p= 0.029). However, there was no significant difference in βE and ME between the groups from 0 hr to 24 hrs post interventions, and no significant correlation between the PI, and βE, or ME. CONCLUSION: TENS significantly reduced PI up to 24 hrs after treatment.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".