Electro-acupuncture for protracted amphetamine abstinence syndrome: study protocol for a pragmatic randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Protracted amphetamine abstinence syndrome is one of the primary causes of relapse for amphetamine-type drug abusers during withdrawal. However, the importance of the management of protracted amphetamine abstinence syndrome is underestimated. Electro-acupuncture may be a safe and effective alternative therapy for protracted amphetamine abstinence syndrome, but the evidence is limited. METHODS: The study is a prospective, two-center, randomized, waitlist controlled, open-label pragmatic trial. A total of 300 patients with protracted amphetamine abstinence syndrome will be recruited. All participants will be randomly assigned to an electro-acupuncture group or a waitlist group in a 1:1 ratio. Participants in the electro-acupuncture group will receive the electrical-acupuncture treatment. Waitlist group participants will not receive electro-acupuncture treatment but will be assessed at each visit. Treatments will be administered twice a week for a total of 4 consecutive weeks. The primary outcome in this study is the change in the ACSA between baseline (week 0) and the completion of treatment (week 4), and the secondary outcomes are changes in the Hamilton Depression Scale (HAMD), the visual analog scale (VAS), the Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAMA), the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and the Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36). DISCUSSION: This study will assess the effectiveness of acupuncture in PAAS in real-world settings to provide support for clinical decisions and a basis for subsequent trials comparing acupuncture with other positive regimens. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ChiCTR2000040619 . Registered on 3 December 2020.
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 | 0.032 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.071 | 0.009 |
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".