MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123544841 · doi:10.1016/s1836-9553(12)70094-2

Daily use of a cane for two months reduced pain and improved function in patients with knee osteoarthritis

2012· letter· en· W2123544841 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of physiotherapy · 2012
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineWOMACOsteoarthritisPhysical therapyVisual analogue scaleQuality of life (healthcare)RheumatologyCaneRandomized controlled trialOutpatient clinicKnee painInternal medicineAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

QUESTION: Does daily use of a cane for two months produce clinical benefits in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA)? DESIGN: A randomised, controlled trial where group allocation was carried out by computer-generated randomisation in a 1:1 ratio. SETTING: An outpatient rheumatology clinic in Sao Paulo, Brazil. PARTICIPANTS: Men and women with the diagnosis of knee OA according to the American College of Rheumatology criteria, knee pain score between 3 and 7 (on a 0-10 Visual Analogue Scale), stable doses of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and no regular physical exercise or use of canes in the months prior to the study. Additional exclusion criteria were: symptomatic heart disease, symptomatic disease of the lower limbs (other than knee osteoarthritis) or of the upper limb that would hold the cane, symptomatic lung disease, severe systemic disease, and severe psychiatric illness. INTERVENTIONS: Each participant in the intervention group received an individually height adjusted wooden cane with a T-shaped handle and instruction in how to use it on the contralateral side at the start of the intervention and after one month. They were instructed to use the cane daily. The participants in the control group were instructed not use any gait device for two months, but otherwise to maintain their normal lives including treatment as usual. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was pain measured on a 0-10 Visual Analogue Scale at one and two months. Secondary outcomes were function measured with the Lequesne knee questionnaire and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) questionnaire), health related quality of life (SF-36), energy expenditure during a 6-minute walk test, and consumption of NSAIDs. RESULTS: In total 64 patients were assigned to the intervention (n=32) and control groups (n=32), and 59 completed the two month follow-up. Mean differences in pain were 0.8 (95% CI 0.3 to 1.3) at one month follow up and 2.1 (95% CI 1.4 to 2.8) at two months, both in the favour of the intervention group. There were significant differences in favour of the intervention group in Lequesne knee questionnaire, SF-36 Bodily Pain and Role Physical scores, and consumption of NSAIDs. CONCLUSION: Use of a cane can diminish pain and improve physical functioning in patients with knee osteoarthritis. [95% CIs calculated by the CAP Editors.].

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.727
Threshold uncertainty score0.857

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.233 · 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