Effects of Cupping Therapy on Lower Quarter Y-Balance Test Scores in Collegiate Baseball Players
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cupping therapy is a therapeutic modality that has been suggested to improve blood flow, decrease pain, and increase function.Due to the scarcity of the literature in regard to best practices, parameters for prescribing and applying cupping therapy is absent in competitive athletic population.To ensure appropriate usage of cupping therapy, gaps in the literature on range of motion, strength, proprioception, power, speed and agility must be investigated.Therefore, the purpose of this study is to examine the effects of a single cupping therapy treatment to the gastrocnemius on Lower Quarter Y-Balance Test (YBT) scores in collegiate baseball players.Ten male (age 21.6 ± 1.90) collegiate baseball players participated in this study.Participants completed three attempts in the anterior, posterolateral, and posteromedial directions for both lower extremities per YBT procedures.Following baseline measurements, four plastic cups were applied to the gastrocnemius of the non-dominant lower extremity for 15-minutes.After treatment, follow up YBT scores were taken.Upon completion of data collection paired samples t-tests and oneway repeated measures ANOVAs were performed to determine significant differences in scores following cupping therapy.Significant improvements were found pre-and post-treatment in all three directions in the lower extremity receiving cupping therapy (p < 0.05).When compared with the control extremity, significant differences were found in the anterior and posteromedial directions (p < 0.05).These results suggest that a single cupping therapy treatment to the gastrocnemius may improve anterior and posteromedial YBT scores in collegiate baseball players.Further studies are required to determine the effects of multiple cupping therapy treatments, as well as long term effects of cupping therapy on dynamic stability.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".