Electroacupuncture therapy on non-motor symptoms of patients with ParkinsonÓ?s disease: results of a pilot study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to assess the effect of electroacupuncture (EA) on non-motor symptoms in Parkinson's disease (PD) patients as a primary goal and motor symptomatology as a secondary outcome.Methods: Twenty-five patients were enrolled in a non-controlled pilot study that involved a 10-session EA intervention in 16 acupoints, applied 3 times a week for 4 weeks.Motor, non-motor, cognitive, and quality of life evaluation were conducted before intervention and 7 days after concluding the last EA session through MDS-Unified PD rating scale (MDS-UPDRS), Non-motor Symptom Scale (NMSS), montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA), and PD questionnaire (PDQ-8), respectively.Results: Patients showed significantly lower scores in the MDS-UPDRS Part II (7.0 5.7 vs. 10.5 7.6, p = 0.046) and Part III (14.0 8.6 vs. 23.1 13.9, p = 0.002), and NMSS total score (35.2 26.6 vs. 54.6 32.5, p = 0.004) in the post-intervention evaluation, with mood/cognition domain of the NMSS being the only significantly affected by treatment.MoCA total score increased after the intervention (24.2 4.5 vs. 21.6 4.3, p = 0.020), while PDQ-8 scores were not significantly affected by the intervention.Conclusions: Non-motor and motor symptomatology were significantly improved after concluding a 10-session EA therapy.Mood and cognitive disorders were the most positively affected by the intervention.Evaluation of the long-term effects of EA in PD is further needed.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".