MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312173008 · doi:10.3389/fpain.2022.1060685

Objective evidence for chronic back pain relief by Medical Yoga therapy

2022· article· en· W4312173008 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Suvercha Arya, Raj Kumar Yadav, Srikumar Venkataraman, Renu Bhatia

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Pain Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAll-India Institute of Medical SciencesDepartment of Science and Technology, Government of KeralaDepartment of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology, India
KeywordsMedicineMcGill Pain QuestionnairePhysical therapyVisual analogue scaleQuality of life (healthcare)Chronic painNociceptionHyperalgesiaNeuropathic painLow back painPhysical medicine and rehabilitationAnesthesiaInternal medicineAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is a musculoskeletal ailment that affects millions globally. The pain is disturbing associated with impaired motor activity, reduced flexibility, decreased productivity and strained interpersonal relationships leading to poor quality of life. Inflammatory mediators in vicinity of nociceptors and amplification of neural signals cause peripheral and central sensitization presented as hyperalgesia and/or allodynia. It could be attributed to either diminished descending pain inhibition or exaggerated ascending pain facilitation. Objective measurement of pain is crucial for diagnosis and management. Nociceptive flexion reflex is a reliable and objective tool for measurement of a subject's pain experience. Medical Yoga Therapy (MYT) has proven to relieve chronic pain, but objective evidence-based assessment of its effects is still lacking. We objectively assessed effect of MYT on pain and quality of life in CLBP patients. We recorded VAS (Visual analogue scale), McGill Pain questionnaire and WHOQOL BREF questionnaire scores, NFR response and Diffuse noxious inhibitory control tests. Medical yoga therapy consisted of an 8-week program (4 weeks supervised and 4 weeks at home practice). CLBP patients (42.5 ± 12.6 years) were randomly allocated to MYT (n = 58) and SCT groups (n = 50), and comparisons between the groups and within the groups were done at baseline and at end of 4 and 8 weeks of both interventions. (VAS) scores for patients in both the groups were comparable at baseline, subjective pain rating decreased significantly more after MYT compared to SCT (p = < 0.0001*, p = 0.005*). McGill Pain questionnaire scores revealed significant reduction in pain experience in MYT group compared to SCT. Nociceptive Flexion Reflex threshold increased significantly in MYT group at end of 4 weeks and 8 weeks, p < 0.0001#, p = < 0.0001∞ respectively) whereas for SCT we did not find any significant change in NFR thresholds. DNIC assessed by CPT also showed significant improvement in descending pain modulation after MYT compared to SCT both at end of 4 and 8 weeks. Quality of life also improved significantly more after MYT. Thus, we conclude with objective evidence that Medical Yoga Therapy relieves chronic low back pain, stress and improves quality of life better than standard care.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.083

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.002

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Pain ResearchSame topicPain Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207