MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

[<i>Fu</i>'s subcutaneous needling combined with scalp acupuncture for shoulder-hand syndrome phaseⅠafter cerebral infarction: a randomized controlled trial].

2024· article· en· W4404434192 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lili Wang, Bo Liu, Xin He, Haoyu Shan, Yuman Xue, Jing Wei, Jia Liu, Wei Jiang, Yuan Wang, Wei Cui

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcupuncture Treatment Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: 's subcutaneous needling combined with scalp acupuncture and simple scalp acupuncture for shoulder-hand syndrome phase Ⅰ after cerebral infarction. METHODS: 's subcutaneous needling was applied at the affected muscles during needle retaining in the combination group, once a day in the first 3 days, once every other day in left days, 2-day interval was taken after 4-time treatment, for 14 days totally. Before and after treatment, the scores of the short form of McGill pain questionnaire (SF-MPQ), edema degree, guides to evaluation of permanent impairment (GEPI), and disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand (DASH) were observed in the two groups, respectively, and the therapeutic effect was evaluated after treatment. RESULTS: <0.05). CONCLUSION: 's subcutaneous needling combined with scalp acupuncture and simple scalp acupuncture can effectively relieve the shoulder joint pain and edema degree of hand, improve the upper limb function in patients with shoulder-hand syndrome phase Ⅰ after cerebral infarction, and the combination therapy has better therapeutic effect than simple scalp acupuncture.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
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 venuePubMedSame topicAcupuncture Treatment Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207