MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022988889 · doi:10.1089/acm.2008.0003

Does Mud Pack Treatment Have Any Chemical Effect? A Randomized Controlled Clinical Study

2008· article· en· W2022988889 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 Alternative and Complementary Medicine · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicTherapeutic Uses of Natural Elements
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineWOMACVisual analogue scaleOsteoarthritisRandomized controlled trialAnalgesicSchmidt sting pain indexPhysical therapySurgeryAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to reveal the efficacy of mud pack treatment in patients with knee osteoarthritis and to find the contribution of chemical factors to the build up of these effects. METHODS: Sixty patients were randomly assigned to directly applied mud pack (study) group or to nylon-covered mud pack (control) group. Thirty patients in the study group had mud application 15 times to both knees: heated mud, up to 43 degrees C, was applied to skin directly for 30 minutes. Thirty patients in the control group had the same treatment as the study group except heated mud was applied over an impermeable nylon pack. Primary outcome measures of the study were the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) index, pain intensity on a visual analog scale (VAS), patient's assessment of disease severity index, physician's assessment of disease severity index, and analgesic consumption. The patients were evaluated before and after (end of 15th application) the intervention and followed up for 24 weeks at 4-week intervals. The results were assessed on an intent-to-treat basis. RESULTS: As compared to the baseline, significant decreases were observed in WOMAC, pain intensity, disease severity index scores, and analgesic consumption in both groups after the intervention. Observed improvements in the study group were found to be superior to the control during the whole postintervention follow-up, except for analgesic consumption in the third week. A significant number of patients in the study group showed minimal clinically important improvement as compared to the control group. CONCLUSION: Mud pack treatment significantly improved the pain and functional status of patients with knee osteoarthritis, whether applied directly or coated with nylon. Direct application was found to be superior, which implies chemical properties of the mud contribute to the build up of therapeutic effect.

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)0.007
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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.325
Threshold uncertainty score0.820

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.135
GPT teacher head0.502
Teacher spread0.366 · 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