MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The efficacy and tolerability of glucosamine sulfate in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

2009· article· en· W2158395079 on OpenAlex
N. Giordano, Antonella Fioravanti, Panagiotis Papakostas, Antonio Montella, Giorgio Giorgi, Ranuccio Nuti

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

VenueCurrent Therapeutic Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTolerabilityPlaceboWOMACOsteoarthritisRandomized controlled trialVisual analogue scaleKnee painPhysical therapyInternal medicineAnesthesiaAdverse effect

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common form of arthritis and is often associated with disability and impaired quality of life. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to assess the efficacy and tolerability of glucosamine sulfate (GS) in the treatment of knee OA. METHODS: Consecutive outpatients affected by primary monolateral or bilateral knee OA were enrolled in this double-blind, double-dummy, prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. One group received GS 1500 mg QD for 12 weeks, and the other group received placebo QD for 12 weeks. The treatment period was followed by a 12-week treatment-free observation phase. Each patient was examined at baseline and at weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24. The primary efficacy criteria were pain at rest and during movement, assessed on a visual analog scale (VAS) of 0 to 100 mm. The secondary criteria included the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) index for total pain score (W-TPS), total stiffness score (W-TSS), and total physical function score (W-TPFS). VAS, W-TPS, W-TSS, and W-TPFS were evaluated at baseline and at weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24. Analgesic drug consumption (ie, acetaminophen or NSAIDs) was also assessed. RESULTS: Patient demographics were similar in the GS and placebo groups. Of 60 randomized patients (30 per group), 56 completed the study (28 treated with GS and 28 who received placebo). Statistically significant improvements in symptomatic knee OA were observed, as measured by differences in resting pain at weeks 8, 12, and 16 (all, P < 0.05 vs placebo) and in pain during movement at weeks 12 and 16 (both, P < 0.05). W-TPS was lower with GS than placebo at weeks 8, 12, and 16 (all, P < 0.01), and at week 20 (P < 0.05). W-TSS was also lower with GS than placebo at weeks 8, 12, 16, and 20 (all, P < 0.05). W-TPFS was lower with GS than placebo at weeks 8 (P < 0.05), 12 (P < 0.01), 16 (P < 0.05), and 20 (P < 0.05). Drug consumption was lower in the GS group than the placebo group at weeks 8, 12, 16, and 20 (all, P < 0.05). The incidence of adverse events was 36.7% with GS and 40.0% with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: GS 1500 mg QD PO for 12 weeks was associated with statistically significant reductions in pain and improvements in functioning, with decreased analgesic consumption, compared with baseline and placebo in these patients with knee OA. A carryover effect was detected after treatment ended.

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)0.004
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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.349
Threshold uncertainty score0.475

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.300 · 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