A prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled study to evaluate the efficacy of intraarticular hyaluronic acid for osteoarthritis of the knee.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of intraarticular (IA) injections of hyaluronic acid (HA) compared to placebo in patients with osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee; and to assess patient satisfaction with treatment relative to placebo, and whether there is a difference between a series of 3 versus 6 consecutive IA injections. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled, 2-arm parallel design trial of 106 patients with radiologically confirmed knee OA. Two-milliliter IA injections using 20 mg/ml HA sodium salt or saline placebo were administered once weekly over 3 weeks (HA and placebo groups), followed by once weekly IA injection with 2.0 ml (20 mg/ml) HA for a further 3 consecutive weeks. The primary efficacy assessment included Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index (WOMAC) score for knee pain (Week 3 score). Secondary efficacy assessments included WOMAC scores for knee pain at Weeks 6 and 12 (followup), as well as WOMAC stiffness, physical function and quality of life scores, visual analog scale (VAS) scores for pain at rest and following walking and stepping activity, range of knee joint motion, and global patient satisfaction with treatment and quality of life using the SF-36. RESULTS: After 3 weeks of study treatment, both treatment groups showed improvements in knee function, the HA group showing a greater improvement compared to placebo in WOMAC knee pain score (p < 0.01). The HA group showed greater (p < 0.05) improvement in the overall WOMAC score and VAS pain following walking and stepping activity at Week 3. Results from all other secondary efficacy assessments at Weeks 6 and 12 including patient satisfaction were similar and were not statistically significant between treatment groups, and there were no significant differences between groups for adverse events. CONCLUSION: Intraarticular HA was superior to placebo in improving knee pain and function, with no difference between 3 or 6 consecutive injections for the primary efficacy assessment.
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 | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".