Oral Chinese herbal medicine in combination with opioids for treatment of cancer pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and aim: While oral Chinese herbal medicine (OCHM) is frequently used for cancer pain (CP), its combined effects with opioids remain unclear. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of OCHM combined with opioids in patients with moderate to severe CP. Experimental procedure: We systematically searched five Chinese and English databases up to December 30th, 2024, for randomized controlled trials comparing OCHM plus opioids versus opioids alone. Primary outcomes were pain relief and pain intensity. Secondary outcomes included onset and duration of pain relief, Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) score, and adverse events. Results: < 0.001). Conclusion: OCHM plus opioids improved pain relief, enhanced the quality of life, reduced opioid-related adverse events in patients with moderate to severe CP compared to opioids alone.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it