Mechanistic study of electroacupuncture in the treatment of insomnia: study protocol for a clinical trial of serum metabolomics based on UPLC-Q/TOF-MS and UPLC-QQQ-MS/MS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Insomnia is the most prevalent sleep disorder worldwide. Electroacupuncture is effective in improving sleep quality, daytime fatigue status, and anxiety and depression in patients with insomnia, and this study aimed to investigate the metabolic pathways and their possible mechanisms in response to the efficacy of electroacupuncture in the treatment of insomnia. Methods: A single-center, double-blind, clinical trial was the study's design. For this study, a total of 99 participants were enrolled, and they will be split into two groups: one for insomnia and the other for health. There are 33 healthy people in the healthy group and 66 insomnia patients in the insomnia group. Acupuncture treatment will be administered to the intervention group three times a week for four weeks, for a total of twelve treatments, and will be followed up for 3 months. A combination of UPLC-Q/TOF-MS and UPLC-QQQ-MS/MS was used to qualitatively and quantitatively examine the serum of 99 participants. The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) and serum metabolomics provided the primary findings. The Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), Hyperarousal Scale (HAS), Fatigue Feverity Scale (FSS), Hamilton Depression Scale (HAMD), Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAMA), Sleep Diary and The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) were the secondary outcomes. For the insomnia group, serum will be collected at baseline, at the end of treatment, and the scale will be collected at baseline, after 4 weeks of treatment, and at 3 months of follow-up. For the healthy group, serum will be collected at baseline. Discussion: This study aimed to assess the modulatory effects of electroacupuncture on relevant metabolic markers using serum metabolomics, to explore the potential mechanisms and relevant metabolic pathways of electroacupuncture for the treatment of insomnia, and to provide strong scientific evidence for the treatment of insomnia by electroacupuncture. Trial registration: ChiCTR2400085660 (China Clinical Trial Registry, http://www.chictr.org.cn, registered on June 14, 2024).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.030 | 0.008 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".