General practitioners’ advice to use topical rather than oral ibuprofen resulted in equivalent effects on chronic knee painCommentary
Bibliographic record
Abstract
M Underwood Professor M Underwood, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK; M.Underwood@warwick.ac.uk For older patients with chronic knee pain, should general practitioners advise use of topical or oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs)? ### Design: randomised controlled trial (Topical or Oral Ibuprofen [TOIB]). ### Allocation: concealed. ### Blinding: blinded (data collectors). ### Follow-up period: 12 months. ### Setting: 26 general practices in the UK. ### Patients: 282 patients ⩾50 years of age (mean age 63 y, 54% women) with knee pain (97% with osteoarthritis). Exclusion criteria included history of, or awaiting, knee replacement, and recent knee injury. ### Intervention: the patient’s general practitioner recommended preferential use of topical ibuprofen (n = 138) or oral ibuprofen (n = 144). ### Outcomes: Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score, adverse effects, and cost-effectiveness. The study had >80% power to show equivalence in WOMAC scores to within 10 mm (α = 0.05). ### Patient follow-up: 88% (intention-to-treat …
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".