MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2174622800 · doi:10.1002/bem.21942

Effects of PEMF on patients with osteoarthritis: Results of a prospective, placebo‐controlled, double‐blind study

2015· article· en· W2174622800 on OpenAlex

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

VenueBioelectromagnetics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealthcare and Venom Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWOMACOsteoarthritisMedicinePlaceboVisual analogue scalePlacebo-controlled studyPhysical therapyDouble blindRheumatologyRandomized controlled trialAnesthesiaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aimed to evaluate effects of pulsed electromagnetic fields (PEMF) in a double blind study on patients with knee joint osteoarthritis. The MAGCELL ARTHRO electrode-less therapy delivered a sinusoidal magnetic field, varying in frequency between 4 and 12 Hz. In 1 cm tissue depth, magnetic flux density was 105 mT. A total of n = 57 patients were randomly assigned to the verum, PEMF or placebo group (placebo device). Their average age was 61.6 ± 12.0 years. According to American College of Rheumatology criteria the osteoarthritis level was 2.8 ± 0.8. Treatment was performed twice a day for 5 min over a period of 18 days. Treatment with the MAGCELL device versus control (sham exposed) showed a highly significant reduction in pain (P < 0.001), a significant reduction in stiffness (P = 0.032) and a significant reduction in disability in daily activities (P = 0.005) according to the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scales-with a good overall treatment tolerance. In the placebo group there was no evidence of a significant change between the initial and final examination in any of the three above-mentioned WOMAC scales. Results of this partly randomized placebo-controlled double-blind study show clinically at any rate, that use of PEMF lead to highly significant better results in the treatment group compared to the placebo group with regard to the total WOMAC global score and especially for visual analogue scale. Patient assessment of the "effectiveness" was rated in 29.5% as very good and good in 27.3% compared to 0.0% and 15.4% in controls. This therapy is thus a useful complementary treatment option with no side effects.

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)0.000
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 score0.431
Threshold uncertainty score0.570

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.293 · 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