The Effect of Oral Cryotherapy and Gargling with Cold Water in the Prevention and Symptom Management of Oral Mucositis the Patients with Breast Cancer Undergoing Chemotherapy: An Assessor-Blinded, Parallel-Group, Three-Arm, Randomized Controlled Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To determine the effects of oral cryotherapy (OC) and gargling with cold water (GCW) in the prevention and symptom management of oral mucositis (OM) in patients with breast cancer undergoing chemotherapy. Material and Methods: This parallel-grouped, three-arm, randomized, and assessor-blinded trial used the OC and GCW. 105 eligible patients with breast cancer were assigned to 3 groups. OC (n=35) and GCW (n=35) for intervention groups were performed in three stages: I) instructions on by the investigator at the hospital; II) the implementation accompanied by the investigator at the hospital; III) the individual application of at home by patients. The patients in the control group (n=35) received standard care. Additionally, ''Patient Information Form '', ''Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale'', ''World Health Organization Mucositis Scale (OTS)'', and ''Visual Analog Scale (VAS)'' were conducted. Results: OTS and VAS scales, the OC group was significantly more effective than the GCW and control groups throughout the beginning 21-day period. During the 1st 16 days of evaluating the OTS and VAS conditions, the GCW groups showed significantly more effectiveness than the control group. Conclusion: OC alone was effective and safe for treating OM. The results of this study showed the clinical applicability of OC in the management of OM. OC and GCW significantly reduced the pain and toxicity scale in the first 16 days. There was no significant difference between the GCW and control groups between the 16-21 days.
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 | 0.005 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".