Investigating the Effectiveness of Electroacupuncture for Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy and Exploring the Feasibility of Infrared Thermography as an Efficacy Assessment Tool: Study Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) affects patients' quality of life significantly. To date, selecting the appropriate treatment remains challenging. While electroacupuncture (EA) has shown promise as an effective adjunct therapy for DPN, and infrared thermography (IRT) has been considered as a potential predictor of treatment efficacy, the evidence for both remains inconclusive. As such, the objectives of this trial are twofold: to ascertain the efficacy of EA for DPN, and to explore the feasibility of IRT as an adjunctive objective tool for efficacy assessment. Methods: The study was designed as a randomized, parallel, controlled trial. It spanned over 6 weeks of treatment and an additional 4 weeks of follow-up. 104 eligible participants will be stratified for severity of disease: mild with Toronto clinical scoring system(TCSS) score 6-8, moderate (TCSS score 9-11), and severe (TCSS score 12-19), and each level will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio into a EA group and waiting-list group. The waiting-list group received only the current conventional medication, while the EA group received an additional 12 EA sessions on top of the conventional medication. The primary outcome indicators is nerve conduction velocity (NCV), which will be tested at the baseline and week 6. Total clinical efficiency, TCSS, Clinical symptoms score of Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM), Patient global impression of change(PGIC), Temperature of regions of interest (ROIs), and Physico chemical examination will be used as secondary outcome indicators. In addition, safety assessment will be determined based on adverse events during the trial. Conclusion: The expected results of this study will determine whether EA improves efficacy in the treatment of DPN with an acceptable safety profile, and investigating variations in the efficacy of EA across different levels of DPN severity. Furthermore, it will explore the viability of IRT as an objective measure for evaluating treatment effectiveness for DPN. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT06054087.
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 | 0.113 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".