Effect of Reflexotherapy on Controlling Primary Dysmenorrhea among Faculty Nursing Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Primary dysmenorrhea is the most common gynecologic disorder among female adolescents, with a prevalence of 60% to 93%. It leads to several problems in the personal and social life of the female adolescents. Adverse effects of medical treatments and its failure rate of 20-25% have caused many females to seek other complementary and alternative methods for the management of primary dysmenorrhea. Reflexotherapy is one of such methods. So, the aim of this study was to determine the effect of reflexotherapy on controlling primary dysmenorrhea among Faculty Nursing Students. The study was conducted at Faculty Nursing, Tanta University. The total number of study sample was 120 female students from the second year of Faculty Nursing Students who fulfilling the inclusive criteria. Four tools were used for the collection of data: Tool I: Sociodemographic and menstrual history structured interview schedule. Tool II, Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Tool III, Modified McGill Pain Questionnaire Short form (MPQ-SF). Tool IV, Physiological and behavioral responses to pain sheet. The results of this study revealed that after the application of reflexotherapy, the intensity of menstrual pain had a significant decrease among the study group compared to the control group 1st ,2nd and 3rd months post intervention, as well as the intensity of sensory and affective menstrual pain descriptors. In addition the physiological and behavioral responses to menstrual pain were significantly improved. Therefore, the study recommended that reflexotherapy can be used in the management of primary dysmenorrhea and menstruation-related symptoms as this method is noninvasive, easy to perform, and free from the potentially adverse effects of analgesics.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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 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".