Tai Chi Qigong for the quality of life of patients with knee osteoarthritis: a pilot, randomized, waiting list controlled trial
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of Tai Chi Qigong training on the quality of life and physical function of patients with osteoarthritis of the knee. DESIGN: A preliminary, single-blind, randomized controlled trial. SETTING: General community, performed at Hwaseong City Health Center. PARTICIPANTS: Forty-four elderly subjects (mean age, 69.1 +/- 5.4 years) with knee osteoarthritis. INTERVENTION: The patients were randomized (2:1) to: (1) an eight-week Tai Chi Qigong training programme or (2) a waiting list control group. The programme involved eight weeks of group Tai Chi Qigong sessions, with 60 minutes per session twice a week. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was quality of life measured with the Short Form 36 (SF-36) at baseline and week 8. Secondary outcomes included the Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and 6-m walking time. RESULTS: The training group had statistically significant improvements in the quality of life (changes of SF-36, Qigong versus control: 21.6 +/- 16.8 versus 9.8 +/- 13.6, P < 0.05) and 6-m walking test (change in walking time, Qigong versus control: -1.6 +/- 1.7 versus -0.2 +/- 0.8 s, P < 0.01). The WOMAC scores in the training group were markedly improved, although the differences were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Tai Chi Qigong training appears to have beneficial effects in terms of the quality of life and physical functioning of elderly subjects with knee osteoarthritis. However, more rigorous trials are needed to confirm the efficacy of this training for patients with osteoarthritis of the knee.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it