MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4365450872 · doi:10.56367/oag-038-10649

Revolutionary pain relief cream and two-minute exercise to cure and prevent lower back pain

2023· article· en· W4365450872 on OpenAlexaff
Hélène Bertrand

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Access Government · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicShoulder Injury and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProlotherapyPhysical therapyPain reliefTendinopathySurgeryAlternative medicineTendon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Revolutionary pain relief cream and two-minute exercise to cure and prevent lower back pain In an interview with Open Access Government, Dr Helene Bertrand looks to her own back pain journey and the ways she has found to heal herself. Dr. Bertrand suffered from lower back pain for 37 years following the birth of her first child, but despite trying everything, she couldn't get the pain to go away. In 2003, she started working on prolotherapy after using it to relieve her own pain. This is when she started helping patients, and her demand skyrocketed. After conducting a research project on rotator cuff tendinopathy, she realised it was twice as good as physiotherapy in improving pain and function in the shoulder. She then published this paper on rotator cuff tendinopathy “Dextrose Prolotherapy Versus Control Injections in Painful Rotator Cuff Tendinopathy”(1) and started getting referrals. It was then that Helene decided she was going to concentrate on treating pain. After trying 16 different base creams, in 2014, they came up with QR cream, a quick pain relief cream made using Mannitol. She also came up with a two-minute exercise that could relieve lower back pain instantly.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.001

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Access GovernmentSame topicShoulder Injury and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207