Group and home-based tai chi in elderly subjects with knee osteoarthritis: a randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of tai chi consisting of group and home-based sessions in elderly subjects with knee osteoarthritis. DESIGN: A randomized, controlled, single-blinded 12-week trial with stratification by age and sex, and six weeks of follow-up. SETTING: General community. PARTICIPANTS: Forty-one adults (70 +/- 9.2 years) with knee osteoarthritis. INTERVENTIONS: The tai chi programme featured six weeks of group tai chi sessions, 40 min/session, three times a week, followed by another six weeks (weeks 7 -12) of home-based tai chi training. Subjects were requested to discontinue tai chi training during a six-week follow-up detraining period (weeks 13-18). Subjects in the attention control group attended six weeks of health lectures following the same schedule as the group-based tai chi intervention (weeks 0 -6), followed by 12 weeks of no activity (weeks 7-18). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Knee pain measured by visual analogue scale, knee range of motion and physical function measured by Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) were recorded at baseline and every three weeks throughout the 18-week study period. Data were analysed using a mixed model ANOVA. RESULTS: The six weeks of group tai chi followed by another six weeks of home tai chi training showed significant improvements in mean overall knee pain (P = 0.0078), maximum knee pain (P = 0.0035) and the WOMAC subscales of physical function (P = 0.0075) and stiffness (P = 0.0206) compared to the baseline. No significant change of any outcome measure was noted in the attention control group throughout the study. The tai chi group reported lower overall pain and better WOMAC physical function than the attention control group at weeks 9 and 12. All improvements disappeared after detraining.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".