MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Intra-articular hyaluronan therapy

2000· review· en· W2154707877 on OpenAlexaff
K. Wayne Marshall

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Rheumatology · 2000
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsViscosupplementationOsteoarthritisMedicineSynovial fluidHyaluronic acidContext (archaeology)BioinformaticsIntra articularPathologyAnatomyAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The hyaluronan in normal synovial fluid plays an important role in joint homeostasis. It contributes to joint lubrication, buffers load transmission across articular surfaces, provides a renewed source of hyaluronan to joint tissues, and imparts antinociceptive and anti-inflammatory properties to synovial fluid. In osteoarthritis, the molecular weight and concentration of hyaluronan in synovial fluid are diminished. This has led to the proposition that removal of pathologic osteoarthritic synovial fluid and replacement with hyaluronan-based products that restore the molecular weight and concentration of hyaluronan toward normal levels can have beneficial therapeutic effects. This form of treatment for osteoarthritis has been termed viscosupplementation. Within the musculoskeletal community there are diverse opinions, ranging from skepticism to acceptance, about viscosupplementation as a mainstream symptom-modifying osteoarthritis therapy. This review focuses on recent basic and clinical studies dealing with mechanism of action, symptomatic efficacy, safety, and disease modification, and places these studies in context with earlier studies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.004

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.298 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations84
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in RheumatologySame topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207