MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Are foot orthotics efficacious for treating painful medial compartment knee osteoarthritis? A review of the literature

2004· review· en· W2035522591 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Clinical Practice · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOrthoticsOsteoarthritisPhysical therapyFoot OrthosesFoot (prosody)Physical medicine and rehabilitationCompartment (ship)Alternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work examined the evidence base concerning the efficacy of laterally wedged foot orthotics for improving the symptomatology associated with painful disabling osteoarthritis of the knee medial compartment. To this end, all relevant peer-reviewed publications on this topic published in the English language were retrieved and analysed. In addition, related biomechanical publications were analysed. These data indicate a strong scientific basis for applying wedged insoles in attempts to reduce osteoarthritic pain of biomechanical origin. Further research to substantiate their efficacy in well-designed clinical trials seems warranted.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.972
Threshold uncertainty score0.978

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.468
Teacher spread0.381 · 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