MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413824744 · doi:10.3389/fneur.2025.1609674

Comparative efficacy of moxibustion as an add-on treatment with different durations for diabetic peripheral neuropathy: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

2025· article· en· W4413824744 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yurong Kang, Hantong Hu, Can Lin, Yu Zheng, Zhouyuan Wei, Xiaofen He, Jianqiao Fang, Yongliang Jiang

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neurology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcupuncture Treatment Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Zhejiang ProvinceState Administration of Traditional Chinese Medicine of the People's Republic of ChinaZhejiang University
KeywordsMedicinePeripheral neuropathyMoxibustionProtocol (science)Randomized controlled trialPeripheralPhysical therapyInternal medicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationDiabetes mellitusAlternative medicineAcupunctureEndocrinologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy (DPN) can markedly diminish patients' quality of life. Current treatments provide limited relief, driving interest in non-invasive options such as moxibustion. Moxibustion, a technique rooted in acupuncture, shows promise for managing pain. However, it lacks standardized protocols for treating DPN, especially concerning moxibustion duration, and its effectiveness for DPN is not well-supported by evidence. Thus, this study seeks to identify the optimal moxibustion duration to relieve DPN symptoms and enhance nerve function, filling an important gap in clinical practice. Methods: Participants will be randomly allocated to three clinical centers, with 30 individuals at each center, and evenly divided among the conventional treatment group, the 15-min moxibustion group, and the 30-min moxibustion group. The conventional treatment group will be administered mecobalamin and epalrestat for a duration of 4 weeks, while the moxibustion groups will receive moxubustion as an add-on therapy treatment twice a week over the same period. The duration of moxibustion differs from the 15-min group, while the procedure remains consistent across the moxibustion groups. The primary outcome is total clinical effectiveness. The second outcomes include electrophysiological examination, the Toronto Clinical Scoring System (TCSS), the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), the Traditional Chinese Medicine Syndrome Score Scale (TCMS), and infrared thermography testing. The outcomes will be assessed during the baseline period, after the 8th treatment, and at the one-month follow-up. Conclusion: This trial aims to identify the optimal moxibustion duration for DPN symptom relief and nerve function improvement, offering evidence for standardized clinical protocols. The findings could enhance treatment efficacy, reduce adverse effects, and alleviate DPN's socio-economic burden. Clinical trial registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/, NCT06330233.

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
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: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.174

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0060.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0150.007
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0070.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0520.007

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.357 · 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
GenreProtocol

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in NeurologySame topicAcupuncture Treatment Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207