MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323316034 · doi:10.2147/jpr.s399132

Effectiveness and Safety of Acupotomy on Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Pragmatic, Pilot, Randomized Controlled Trial

2023· article· en· W4323316034 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pain Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealthcare and Venom Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKorea Institute of Oriental Medicine
KeywordsMedicineLumbar spinal stenosisOswestry Disability IndexPhysical therapyRandomized controlled trialVisual analogue scaleAcupunctureAdverse effectMcGill Pain QuestionnaireLumbarSpinal stenosisSchmidt sting pain indexLow back painSurgeryInternal medicineAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: In Korea, complex treatments such as acupotomy, acupuncture, and physical therapy are performed for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). Although there are reports of acupotomy as monotherapy or acupuncture treatment for LSS, pragmatic studies are lacking. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the effectiveness and safety of acupotomy for LSS to provide baseline evidence for a large-scale study. Materials and Methods: This pragmatic randomized controlled pilot study enrolled 34 participants and randomly assigned them to two groups (n=17/group). The intervention was conducted for 8 weeks. Acupotomy plus and usual care groups received acupuncture (17 acupoints) and interferential current therapy (ICT) twice weekly; however, the acupotomy plus group received an additional acupotomy (7 acupoints) for treatment of the usual care group. The primary outcome was measured using visual analog scales (VAS), and secondary outcomes were assessed using the self-rated walking distance, short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ), and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Outcome measurements were conducted at baseline and 4, 8, and 12 weeks after the commencement of the intervention. Adverse events were assessed at each visit. Hematological and biochemical examinations were performed at screening and week 8. Results: Overall, 33 of the 34 participants completed the study, and one participant in the usual care group dropped out. In both groups, VAS scores at weeks 4, 8, and 12 significantly improved compared to baseline. Also, self-rated walking distance, SF-MPQ, and ODI scores were significantly improved at weeks 4, 8, and 12 than at baseline. However, there were no significant differences in the time-dependent and group-to-time interactions between the two groups. In addition, no severe adverse reactions were reported, and there were no significant differences in hematological and biochemical results. Conclusion: This study provides baseline data for large-scale studies on the effectiveness and safety of acupotomy in LSS. Clinical Trial Number: KCT0006234.

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.

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)0.129
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.096
Threshold uncertainty score0.975

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1290.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.474
Teacher spread0.374 · 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