MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Baixa dose de methotrexate comparado a placebo em osteoartrite de joelho

2007· article· pt· W2014089629 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Haroldo Tenório de Holanda, Daniel Feldman Pollak, Mário Luis Cardoso Pucinelli

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Brasileira de Reumatologia · 2007
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineWOMACGynecologyPlaceboOsteoarthritis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJETIVO: avaliar a eficácia de baixa dose de metotrexato (MTX) em osteoartrite (OA) de joelho. MÉTODOS : 58 pacientes foram separados em dois grupos em um estudo prospectivo, duplo-cego, placebo-controlado, randomizado, com duração de 4 meses. O grupo 1 recebeu metotrexato na dose de 7,5 mg por semana e o grupo 2 recebeu placebo. Foram utilizados como medidas de avaliação primária o Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), o Índice Algofuncional de Lequesne e a Escala Visual Analógica (EVA) para dor. A quantidade consumida de comprimidos de paracetamol para analgesia serviu como medida de avaliação secundária. RESULTADOS : a média de idade dos pacientes foi de 61,8 anos no grupo 1 e de 60,4 anos no grupo 2 (p = 0,43). Houve predomínio de mulheres em ambos os grupos com 93,1% no grupo 1 e 72,4% no grupo 2 (p = 0,08). Não houve diferença estatisticamente significante entre os grupos com relação ao WOMAC (p = 0,94), Lequesne (p = 0,87) e EVA (p = 0,89). Também não houve diferença estatística significante entre os grupos (0,09) quanto ao consumo de paracetamol, mas houve tendência a consumo maior de analgésico no grupo placebo. CONCLUSÃO : metotrexato não trouxe alívio sintomático nem reduziu limitação funcional quando comparado ao placebo em osteoartrite de joelho. Metotrexato mostrou uma tendência a menor consumo de analgésicos em osteoartrite de joelho.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.222
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations21
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Brasileira de ReumatologiaSame topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207