Role of Tissue Specific Plantar Fascia Stretching Exercises Versus Myofascial Released Technique in Chronic Plantar Fasciitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: The effectiveness of tissue specific stretching exercises and myofascial released technique on intensity of pain and Foot function was compared in chronic plantar fasciitis patients. Study Design: Randomized controlled trial study Place and Duration of Study: This study was conducted at Al-Ain Poly clinic Karachi between 2012-13. Materials and Methods: Fifty patients with chronic plantar fasciitis were enrolled through convenience sampling and were randomly assigned into Stretching Exercise and Myofascial Release Technique groups. Intensity of pain and foot function were evaluated by Visual Analouge Scale and foot function index, respectively. Ten sessions were done for both groups. T-tests and ANCOVA test were used for statistical analysis (p<0.05). Results: The score of visual analogue scale (VAS) and foot functioning index (FFI) improved in both groups, though the decrease of intensity of pain was more in stretching exercises Group (p<0.01). Additionally, improvement in foot functioning index did not significantly differ between two groups. Conclusion: The stretching exercises can reduce pain and improve foot functioning in chronic plantar fasciitis.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".