Long‐Term Effects of Glucosamine and Chondroitin Sulfate on the Progression of Structural Changes in Knee Osteoarthritis: Six‐Year Followup Data From the Osteoarthritis Initiative
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the long-term (6-year) effect of combined glucosamine (Glu) and chondroitin sulfate (CS) treatment on cartilage volume in knee osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: Participants were from the Osteoarthritis Initiative progression and incidence subcohorts, had magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the target knee at baseline and 6 years, joint space width >1 mm, and data available on Glu/CS consumption (n = 1,593). They were stratified into 2 main groups based on whether or not they had medial meniscal extrusion at baseline. The group with meniscal extrusion (n = 429) was further stratified into subgroups based on exposure or no exposure to Glu/CS as follows: not exposed, 1 year, 2-3 years, and 4-6 years. Cartilage volume was assessed using fully automated quantitative MRI technology. RESULTS: The Jonckheere-Terpstra trend test indicated that treatment with Glu/CS significantly reduced the cartilage volume loss in the global knee, associated with the lateral compartment. Multivariate analysis further demonstrated that the extent of the treatment's positive effect was related to exposure time to treatment, the protective effect at 6 years being significant in participants exposed to ≥2 years of treatment. CONCLUSION: These findings provide future support for the long-term protective structure-modifying effects of Glu/CS treatment in knee OA subjects.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".