Efficacy and safety of transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation for the management of primary dysmenorrhoea: protocol for a randomised controlled trial in China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Primary dysmenorrhoea (PD) is a common menstrual concern with significant physical and psychosocial impacts. The effectiveness and safety of transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation (TEAS) in alleviating PD symptoms remain uncertain due to insufficient evidence. This single-centre, parallel, randomised controlled study intends to evaluate the efficacy and safety of TEAS for PD management. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: 60 participants aged 18-40 years diagnosed with moderate to severe PD will be recruited from Tai'an Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) and randomly assigned to either a TEAS group or a TEAS-sham group (1:1). The TEAS group will undergo 12 sessions of TEAS treatment over two menstrual cycles, with 30 min per session, three sessions weekly. Participants in the TEAS-sham group will receive TEAS stimulation using identical devices and protocols but without current output. The primary outcome is the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for pain assessment. Secondary outcomes are Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire, total effective rate, uterine artery haemodynamics, prostaglandin and β-endorphin level, mental well-being and quality of life. Adverse events and their potential reasons and the use of analgesics will also be recorded. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of Tai'an Hospital of TCM. Written informed consent will be obtained from each participant. The results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR2300071686.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".