MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283748592 · doi:10.2196/38950

Therapist-Delivered Versus Care Ally–Assisted Massage for Veterans With Chronic Neck Pain: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

2022· article· en· W4283748592 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Niki Munk, Joanne Daggy, Erica Evans, Matthew Kline, James E. Slaven, Brian Laws, Trevor Foote, Marianne S. Matthias, Matthew J. Bair

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicComplementary and Alternative Medicine Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMassageRandomized controlled trialMedicinePhysical therapyRandomizationQuality of life (healthcare)Neck painClinical trialAlternative medicineNursingSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Chronic neck pain (CNP) is prevalent, and it reduces functional status and quality of life and is associated with deleterious psychological outcomes in affected individuals. Despite the desirability of massage and its demonstrated effectiveness in CNP treatment, multiple accessibility barriers exist. Caregiver-applied massage has demonstrated feasibility in various populations but has not been examined in Veterans with CNP or compared in parallel to therapist-delivered massage. OBJECTIVE: This manuscript described the original study design, lessons learned, and resultant design modifications for the Trial Outcomes for Massage: Care Ally-Assisted Versus Therapist-Treated (TOMCATT) study. METHODS: TOMCATT began as a 3-arm, randomized controlled trial of 2 massage delivery approaches for Veterans with CNP with measures collected at baseline, 1 and 3 months after intervention, and 6 months (follow-up). Arm I, care ally-assisted massage, consisted of an in-person, 3.5-hour training workshop, an instructional DVD, a printed treatment manual, and three 30-minute at-home care ally-assisted massage sessions weekly for 3 months. Arm II, therapist-treated massage, consisted of two 60-minute sessions tailored to individual pain experiences and treatments per week for 3 months. The treatments followed a standardized Swedish massage approach. Arm III consisted of wait-list control. RESULTS: Retention and engagement challenges in the first 30 months were significant in the care ally-assisted massage study arm (63% attrition between randomization and treatment initiation) and prompted modification to a 2-arm trial, that is, removing arm I. CONCLUSIONS: The modified TOMCATT study successfully launched and exceeded recruitment goals 2.5 months before the necessary COVID-19 pause and is expected to be completed by early 2023. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03100539; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03100539. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/38950.

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 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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.344
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.271
GPT teacher head0.557
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicComplementary and Alternative Medicine StudiesFrench-language works237,207