MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6940119737 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.c.5137449

Manual acupuncture versus sham acupuncture and usual care for the prevention of primary dysmenorrhea (PD): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

2020· other· en· W6940119737 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2020
Typeother
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcupunctureRandomized controlled trialDry needlingVisual analogue scaleBeck Depression InventoryClinical trialBeck Anxiety InventoryAnxietyPittsburgh Sleep Quality Index

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Primary dysmenorrhea (PD) is a leading cause of dysmenorrhea among adolescent girls. Manual acupuncture may be considered as an effective treatment for PD, but high-quality evidence remains limited. This trial aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of acupuncture for the prevention of PD as compared with sham acupuncture and usual care. Methods/design This is a three-arm, randomized, controlled clinical trial in which the patients, assessors, and statisticians will be blinded. A total of 300 acupuncture-naive patients who were diagnosed as PD will be randomly allocated to the verum acupuncture, sham acupuncture, or usual care groups in a 2:2:1 ratio. Patients in the verum acupuncture group will receive manual acupuncture at specific acupuncture points with penetrating needling, while those in the sham acupuncture group will receive non-penetrating needling at non-acupuncture points. They will be given five sessions over a menstrual cycle for 3 menstrual cycles. Patients in the usual care group will receive health education and informed to receive manual acupuncture for free after waiting for 7 menstrual cycles. The primary outcome will be the change from baseline in the Cox Menstrual Symptom Scale Score (CMSS). The secondary outcomes will be the changes in Massachusetts General Hospital Acupuncture Sensation Scale (MASS), visual analog scale (VAS), Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire 2 (SF-MPQ-2), Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), Beck Depression Inventory II (BDI- II), Acupuncture Expectancy Scale (AES), 60-item NEO Personality Inventory-Short Form (NEO-FFI), and acute medication intake. The adverse events will be recorded at every visit. The analyses will be performed base on a full analysis set (FAS) and a per-protocol set (PPS). Discussion This study may provide high-quality evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of manual acupuncture for PD. In addition, the results of this study will help to identify the efficacy of acupuncture due to the specific effects of acupuncture or placebo effects of acupuncture ritual. Trial registration Clinical Trials.gov NCT02783534 . Registered on 26 May 2016

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)0.035
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.038
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 score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.261

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0350.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0070.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0190.009
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0090.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0780.012

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.272 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshare→Same topicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions→French-language works237,207→