Efficacy and Safety of <i>Derris scandens</i> Benth Extracts in Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to determine the efficacy and safety of Derris scandens Benth extracts in pain reduction and functional improvement in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA). DESIGN: This was a prospective, randomized, controlled trial, single-blinded (assessor). SETTINGS: The study was conducted at the Rehabilitation Medicine Department, Siriraj Hospital. SUBJECTS: One hundred and seven (107) patients with primary OA knee who had pain score of ≥ 5 were recruited. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to receive naproxen 500 mg/day or Derris 800 mg/day for 4 weeks. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Western Ontario McMaster Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores and 6-minute walking distance were the outcome measurements. RESULTS: Fifty-five (55) and 52 patients were randomized to Derris and naproxen groups, respectively. The mean differences of all WOMAC scores between 2 groups at week 4 adjusted by week 0 were within ± 1 point. The mean scores of the aforementioned outcomes at weeks 0, 2, and 4 were significantly improved compared to the baseline values. There was no difference of WOMAC scores between groups. The gastrointestinal irritation and dyspepsia were observed more often in the naproxen than in the Derris group. CONCLUSIONS: Derris scandens Benth extracts were efficacious and safe for the treatment of 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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".