Effect of dry needling on pain and central sensitization in women with chronic pelvic pain: A randomized parallel-group controlled clinical trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chronic pelvic pain (CPP) is a debilitating problem in women with clear evidence of myofascial dysfunction. It seems that Myofascial trigger points (MTrPs) contribute to the development of central sensitization (CS). This study aimed to investigate the effect of dry needling on pain and CS in women with CPP. Thirty-six women with CPP participated in this randomized controlled clinical trial and randomly assigned into three groups: dry needling group (DNG), placebo needling group (PNG) and control group (CG). The DNG received five sessions of DN using the "static needling", the PNG received non-penetrating method, and the CG did not receive any intervention. Assessment of outcomes including central sensitization inventory (CSI), short-form McGill pain questionnaire (SF-MPQ), electroencephalography (EEG), conditioned pain modulation (CPM), salivary cortisol concentration, 7-item general anxiety disorder scale (GAD-7), pain catastrophizing scale (PCS), and SF-36 questionnaire was performed pre-intervention, post-intervention, and three months post-intervention by a blind examiner. The result showed a significant group-by-time interaction for CSI, SF-MPQ, and PCS. There was a significant decrease in CSI score in post-intervention and three-months post-intervention compare to pre-intervention in the DNG and PNG. SF-MPQ-PPI score in DNG significantly decreased post-intervention. PCS-Total score decreased significantly post-intervention in DNG and PNG. No significant group-by-time interactions were observed for other variables. EEG results showed regional changes in the activity of frequency bands in both eye closed and eye open conditions. It seems that DN can affect central pain processing by removing the source of peripheral nociception. Trial registration: Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (IRCT20211114053057N1, registered on: December 03, 2021. https://irct.behdasht.gov.ir/search/result?query=IRCT20211114053057N1).
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".