Viscosupplementation: Therapeutic Mechanisms and Clinical Potential in Osteoarthritis of the Knee
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Viscosupplementation by means of intra-articular injections of hyaluronic acid has been used to treat osteoarthritis of the knee. The proposed mechanisms of action result from the physical properties of hyaluronic acid, as well as from its anti-inflammatory, anabolic, local analgesic, and chrondroprotective effects. Adverse reactions from hyaluronic acid injections into the knee occurred in 8.3% of the 336 patients treated in one study, but at a rate of less than 3% per injection. Reactions were almost always local and generally resolved over 1 to 2 days. Hyaluronic acid injections were approved by the US Food and Drug Administration as a medical device; thus, the level of efficacy demonstrated is less than might have been required for approval as a drug. Several studies have failed to show statistically significant benefit compared with placebo. Furthermore, the treatment is relatively expensive; the cost of the drug for a series of injections is more than $500 per knee. Therefore, widespread use of these agents should be limited until more convincing data on their efficacy are available from well-designed clinical trials.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
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".