MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401359551 · doi:10.1213/xaa.0000000000001834

Effectiveness of Scrambler Therapy for Alleviating Phantom Limb Pain: A Case Report

2024· article· en· W4401359551 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Peter D. Vu, Salahadin Abdi

Bibliographic record

VenueA&A Practice · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Management and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhantom limb painNeuromodulationAmputationNeuropathic painMedicinePhantom limbPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhysical therapyComplex regional pain syndromeChronic painPhantom painAnesthesiaSurgeryCentral nervous systemInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Among the 2 million amputees in the United States, 60% to 90% will experience phantom limb pain (PLP). Managing PLP presents challenges with current evidence-based pharmacological and interventional therapies yielding varied results. In recent years, advancements in neuromodulation, such as scrambler therapy (ST), have demonstrated effectiveness in addressing various chronic and neuropathic pain syndromes. In terms of PLP, however, cases have been limited. This case highlights further evidence supporting ST for PLP over 5 years. Furthermore, we provide clinical images of the amputation with ST electrodes as well as a 5-year record of pain and Edmonton Symptom Assessment System scores.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.797
Threshold uncertainty score0.360

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.344 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueA&A PracticeSame topicPain Management and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207