MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7095722354

Research Article Auricular Acupressure for Managing Postoperative Pain and Knee Motion in Patients with Total Knee Replacement: A Randomized Sham Control Study

2012· article· en· W7095722354 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusicians’ Health and Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcupressureRange of motionVisual analogue scaleRandomized controlled trialMcGill Pain QuestionnairePostoperative painTotal knee arthroplasty
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Copyright © 2012 Ling-hua Chang et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Background. Postoperative pain management remains a significant challenge for all healthcare providers. A randomized controlled trial was conducted to examine the adjuvant effects of auricular acupressure on relieving postoperative pain and improving the passive range of motion in patients with total knee replacement (TKR). Method. Sixty-two patients who had undergone a TKR were randomly assigned to the acupressure group and the sham control group. The intervention was delivered three times a day for 3 days. A visual analog scale (VAS) and the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire were used to assess pain intensity. Pain medication consumption was recorded, and the knee motion was measured using a goniometer. Results. The patients experienced

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.297 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMusicians’ Health and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207