The effectiveness of different physical therapy methodologies in patients with lumbar radiculopathy caused by pain.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of the study – to evaluate the effectiveness of different physical therapy methodologies in patients with lumbar radiculopathy caused by pain. The tasks of the study are: 1. To evaluate the effectiveness of different physical therapy methodologies for pain in patients with lumbar radiculopathy caused by pain. 2. To evaluate the effectiveness of different physical therapy methodologies for back and abdominal muscle endurance in patients with lumbar radiculopathy caused by pain. 3. To evaluate the effectiveness of different physical therapy methodologies for lumbar spine mobility in patients with lumbar radiculopathy caused by pain. The participants of the study. Patients with lumbar radiculopathy caused by pain. The methodology of the study. SAS - digital pain scale to assess pain intensity, inclinometry - to measure lumbar spine movement amplitudes, Schober test - to assess lumbar spine mobility, Lovett test - to assess lower limb muscle strength, McGill torso test - tests to assess abdominal, dorsal muscle, back - to evaluate the influence of back pain on the patient's functional condition in various life situations, questionnaire survey. Conclusions of the study. Decreased sensation of pain, increased lumbar spine amplitude, mobility, muscle strength, abdominal and back static endurance.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".