Manobra do Ligamento Largo versus Liberacao Miofascial Instrumentalizada na Sindrome Pre Menstrual e dismenorreia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Dysmenorrhea is the most disabling symptom of premenstrual syndrome (PMS), for which there are both external and intracavitary myofascial release techniques. Aims: To compare the effectiveness and efficiency of two myofascial release protocols, one internal and one external, in relieving dysmenorrhea and other PMS symptoms. Method: 12 women with an average age of 21.1 years were randomized into two groups and received a weekly session of instrumented myofascial release (G2) or the Broad Ligament Maneuver (G1) for four weeks. Before and after the intervention, pain intensity (VAS), pain quality (McGill) and SPM itself (PSST) were measured. Results: Initially half of the volunteers had PMS, and the average scores for VAS and McGill were 8 and 44.4 respectively. After the intervention, none met the SPM criteria and the VAS and McGill scores fell to 1.9 and 7.9 respectively, with more significant results for G1. Conclusion: Both the Largo Ligament Maneuver and IASTM® Instrumentalized Myofascial Release are efficient in the treatment of PMS and dysmenorrhea, with a slight advantage for the former. The etiology of dysmenorrhea and PMS must lie in myofascial and not hormonal dysfunctions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".