MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134453892 · doi:10.1002/lsm.10236

Efficacy of different therapy regimes of low‐power laser in painful osteoarthritis of the knee: A double‐blind and randomized‐controlled trial

2003· article· en· W2134453892 on OpenAlex
Ali Gür, Abdülkadir Cosut, Ayşegül Jale Saraç, Remzi Çevik, Kemal Nas, Aşur Uyar

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

VenueLasers in Surgery and Medicine · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLaser Applications in Dentistry and Medicine
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineWOMACOsteoarthritisPlaceboPhysical therapyRandomized controlled trialLow level laser therapyQuality of life (healthcare)Laser therapySurgeryLaser

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: A prospective, double-blind, randomized, and controlled trial was conducted in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA) to evaluate the efficacy of infrared low-power Gallium-Arsenide (Ga-As) laser therapy (LPLT) and compared two different laser therapy regimes. STUDY DESIGN/MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety patients were randomly assigned to three treatment groups by one of the nontreating authors by drawing 1 of 90 envelopes labeled 'A' (Group I: actual LPLT consisted of 5 minutes, 3 J total dose + exercise; 30 patients), 'B' (Group II: actual LPLT consisted of 3 minutes, 2 J total dose + exercise; 30 patients), and 'C' (Group III: placebo laser group + exercise; 30 patients). All patients received a total of 10 treatments, and exercise therapy program was continued during study (14 weeks). Subjects, physician, and data analysts were unaware of the code for active or placebo laser until the data analysis was complete. All patients were evaluated with respect to pain, degree of active knee flexion, duration of morning stiffness, painless walking distance and duration, and the Western Ontario and Mc Master Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) at week 0, 6, 10, and 14. RESULTS: Statistically significant improvements were indicated in respect to all parameters such as pain, function, and quality of life (QoL) measures in the post-therapy period compared to pre-therapy in both active laser groups (P < 0.01). Improvements in all parameters of the Group I and in parameters, such as pain and WOMAC of the Group II, were more statistically significant when compared with placebo laser group (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrated that applications of LPLT in different dose and duration have not affected results and both therapy regimes were a safe and effective method in 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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.468

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.267 · 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