Fluorescence Optical Imaging of Juvenile Arthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction With an increasing prevalence of citizens of older age and with overweight, the health issues related to knee osteoarthritis (OA) will intensify. Weight loss is considered a primary management strategy in patients with concomitant overweight and knee OA. However, there are no widely available and feasible methods to sustain weight loss in patients with overweight and knee OA. The present protocol describes a randomised controlled trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist liraglutide in a 3 mg/day dosing in patients with overweight and knee OA. Methods and analysis 150 volunteer adult patients with overweight or obesity and knee OA will participate in a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group and single-centre trial. The participants will partake in a run-in diet intervention phase (week −8 to 0) including a low calorie diet and dietetic counselling. At week 0, patients will be randomised to either liraglutide 3 mg/day or liraglutide placebo 3 mg/day for 52 weeks as an add-on to dietetic guidance on re-introducing regular foods and a focus on continued motivation to engage in a healthy lifestyle. The co-primary outcomes are changes in body weight and the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score pain subscale from week 0 to week 52. Ethics and dissemination The trial has been approved by the regional ethics committee in the Capital Region of Denmark, the Danish Medicines Agency and the Danish Data Protection Agency. An external monitoring committee (The Good Clinical Practice Unit at Copenhagen University Hospitals) will oversee the trial. The results will be presented at international scientific meetings and through publications in peer-reviewed journals. Trial registration numbers 2015-005163-16, NCT02905864, U1111-1171-4970 Based on protocol version V.6; 30 January 2017, 15:30 hours
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.003 |
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".