RETRACTED: Effects of massage therapy on pain and anxiety intensity in patients with burns: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
Post-publication record
Source: Retraction Watch, joined by DOI. OpenAlex records retraction as is_retracted, a boolean over a state space with at least four values, so it cannot express an expression of concern, a correction or a reinstatement; it reports them as false, which reads as “fine”.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This systematic review and meta‐analysis aimed to examine the effects of massage therapy on pain and anxiety intensity in patients with burns. A comprehensive, systematic search was conducted in various international electronic databases, such as Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, and Persian electronic databases such as Iranmedex, and Scientific Information Database using keywords extracted from Medical Subject Headings such as ‘Massage therapy’, ‘Musculoskeletal manipulations’, ‘Acute pains’, ‘Burning pain’, and ‘Burn’ from the earliest to October 17, 2022. Cochran's tool is used to check the risk of bias for randomised clinical trial (RCT) articles. The methodological index for non‐randomised studies was used to assess the risk of bias in quasi‐experimental studies. STATA version 14 software was used to perform the meta‐analysis. A 95% confidence interval (CI) was used to determine statistical significance. Heterogeneity was investigated with I2. A P‐value less than .1 was considered statistically significant for publication bias value. A total of 733 patients with burns were included in seven studies. Five studies had an RCT design and two studies had a quasi‐experimental design. The duration of the study was reported in five studies, with a mean of 42.40 weeks. The duration of the intervention was reported in seven studies with a mean of 22.86 minutes. The results of the meta‐analysis showed using various types of massage therapy interventions significantly reduced pain intensity in the intervention group compared with the control group (weighted mean difference: −2.08, 95% CI: −2.55 to −1.62, Z = 8.77, I2: 67.1%, P < .001). Massage therapy intervention significantly reduced the intensity of anxiety in burn patients (standard mean difference: −7.07, 95% CI: −10.13 to −4.01, Z = 4.53, I2: 98.2, P < .001). Overall, the present systematic review and meta‐analysis showed that massage therapy can reduce the intensity of pain and anxiety in burn patients. Therefore, it is recommended that health managers and policymakers pay special attention to massage therapy as a simple, low‐cost, and efficient non‐pharmacological treatment to relieve pain and anxiety in burn patients.
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 | 0.014 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.019 | 0.040 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".