MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389292670 · doi:10.1177/20552076231217817

Long-term effects of deep-learning digital therapeutics on pain, movement control, and preliminary cost-effectiveness in low back pain: A randomized controlled trial

2023· article· en· W4389292670 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

VenueDigital Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Research Foundation of KoreaNational Research Foundation
KeywordsMedicinePhysical therapyOswestry Disability IndexRandomized controlled trialPhysical medicine and rehabilitationRange of motionLow back painVisual analogue scaleSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective The present study aimed to compare the effects of a deep learning–based digital application with digital application physical therapy (DPT) and those of conventional physical therapy (CPT) on back pain intensity, limited functional ability, lower extremity weakness, radicular symptoms, limited range of motion (ROM), functional movement, quality of life, cost-effectiveness, and postintervention questionnaires for perceived transmission risk of COVID-19 and satisfaction results in 100 participants with low back pain (LBP). Methods One hundred participants with LBP were randomized into either DPT or CPT groups, three times per week over four weeks. Outcome measures included the (1) Oswestry Disability Index, (2) Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale, (3) Roland–Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), (4) Numeric Pain Rating Scale, (5) functional movement screen (FMS), (6) short form-12, (7) lower extremity strength, (8) ROM of trunk flexion, extension, and bilateral side bending, (9) questionnaires for perceived transmission risk of COVID-19, (10) preliminary cost-effectiveness, and (11) postintervention satisfaction questionnaire results. The analysis of variance was conducted at p < 0.05. Results Analysis of variance showed that DPT showed superior effects, compared to CPT on RMDQ, hip extensor strength, transmission risk of COVID-19, as well as satisfaction. Both groups showed significant improvement pre- and postintervention, suggesting that DPT is as effective as CPT, and was superior in preliminary cost-effectiveness and transmission risk of COVID-19. Conclusions Our results provide novel, promising clinical evidence that DPT was as effective as CPT in improving structural and functional impairment, activity limitation, and participation restriction. Our results highlight the successful incorporation of DPT intervention for clinical outcome measures, lower extremity strength, trunk mobility, ADL improvement, QOL improvement, and FMS in LBP.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.203
Threshold uncertainty score0.769

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.292 · 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