MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019941456 · doi:10.1682/jrrd.2005.10.0161

Effects of footwear on medial compartment knee osteoarthritis

2006· article· en· W2019941456 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLower Extremity Biomechanics and Pathologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOsteoarthritisWOMACMedicinePhysical therapyStair climbingKnee painKnee JointPhysical medicine and rehabilitationSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This pilot study investigated whether lateral-wedge insoles inserted into shock-absorbing walking shoes altered joint pain, stiffness, and physical function in patients with symptomatic medial compartment knee osteoarthritis (OA). Twenty-eight subjects wore full-length lateral-wedge insoles with an incline of 4 degrees in their walking shoes for 4 weeks. Pain, stiffness, and functional status were measured with the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) Osteoarthritis Index at baseline and 4 weeks postintervention. Significant improvements were observed in all three WOMAC subscales (pain, stiffness, and function). Pain scores were significantly reduced for the most challenging activity-stair climbing. Subjects wore insoles daily and tolerated them well. The results of this study indicated that lateral-wedge insoles inserted into shock-absorbing walking shoes are an effective treatment for medial compartment knee OA.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.675
Threshold uncertainty score0.161

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.245 · 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