MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7162901666

Point-pricking method with fire needle for knee osteoarthritis: a randomized controlled trial

2022· article· zh· W7162901666 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gao Yuan-jie, Jing-Qing Sun, HOU Xue-si, JI Xu, Bin Li, Yuanbo Fu, Jing Jing Guo, Fan Zhang, CHEN Yi-ling, YUAN Fang

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2022
Typearticle
Languagezh
FieldMedicine
TopicAcupuncture Treatment Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDry needlingOsteoarthritisRandomized controlled trialWOMACAcupunctureVisual analogue scaleAdverse effect
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To observe the effects of point-pricking method with fire needle on the symptoms of knee joint and physio-psychological health in the patients with knee osteoarthritis(KOA). Methods Sixty six patients with KOA were randomly divided into a fire needling group(33 cases) and a filiform needling group(33 cases). The patients received the point-pricking method with fire needle in the fire needle group while the conventional acupuncture with filiform needle was provided in the filiform needling group. The basic health management was performed in both groups. The acupoints included bilateral Liangqiu(ST34), Xuehai(SP10), Dubi(ST35), Neixiyan(EX-LE4), Yanglingquan(GB34) and Zusanli(ST36) as well as Ashi points. The treatment was conducted twice a week for 6 weeks consecutively. Before and after treatment, the scores of Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index(WOMAC), traditional Chinese medicine(TCM) symptoms and visual analogue score(VAS), the numbers of affected areas of knee joint pain and the scores of 12-item short-form health survey(SF-12) were assessed and the incidence of adverse effects was recorded. Results The score for pain, stiffness and function, as well as the total score of WOMAC were all reduced(P<0.05), the score of TCM symptoms, VAS score and the numbers of the affected areas of knee joint pain were lower(P<0.05) after treatment when compared with those before treatment within group. After treatment, the score of each domain of SF-12(i.e. general health, physical function, role-physical, vitality, role-emotional, physical component summary and mental component summary) was higher in comparison to those before treatment in both groups(P<0.05), while the scores of bodily pain, mental health and social functioning in SF-12 were increased in the fire needling group(P<0.05). Compared with the filiform needling group, the score of joint function and the total score in WOMAC and VAS score were reduced remarkably(P<0.05), and general health score in SF-12 was more obviously increased(P<0.05) in the fire needling group after treatment. None adverse effects were found in either group. Conclusion The point-pricking method with fire needle is safe and effective when compared with conventional acupuncture with filiform needle. In the aspects of improving knee joint function, relieving joint pain and advancing the quality of life, the point-pricking method with fire needle is superior to the conventional acupuncture with filiform needle.

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)0.002
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.168
GPT teacher head0.549
Teacher spread0.382 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicAcupuncture Treatment Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207