MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2297510202 · doi:10.2340/16501977-2062

Effects of neuromuscular electrical stimulation and low-level laser therapy on neuromuscular parameters and health status in elderly women with knee osteoarthritis: A randomized trial

2016· article· en· W2297510202 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mônica de Oliveira Melo, Klauber Dalcero Pompeo, Bruno Manfredini Baroni, Marco Aurélio Vaz

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Rehabilitation Medicine · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLaser Applications in Dentistry and Medicine
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIsometric exerciseMedicineElectrical muscle stimulationOsteoarthritisStimulationRandomized controlled trialPhysical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationElectromyographyFunctional electrical stimulationLow level laser therapyElectrotherapyInternal medicineLaser therapyLaser

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effects of neuromuscular electrical stimulation and low-level laser therapy on neuromuscular parameters and health status in elderly subjects with knee osteoarthritis. DESIGN: A randomized evaluator-blinded clinical trial. SUBJECTS: Forty-five elderly women with knee osteoarthritis. METHODS: Subjects were randomized into 1 of the following 3 intervention groups: electrical stimulation group (18-32 min pulsed current, stimulation frequency 80 Hz, pulse duration 400 μs, stimulation intensity 40% of maximal isometric voluntary contraction), laser group (dose 4-6 J per point, 6 points at the knee joint) or combined group (electrical stimulation plus laser therapy). The outcomes included muscle thickness and anatomical cross-sectional area (ultrasonography), knee extensors' electrical activity (electromyography), torque (dynamometry) and health status (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index). All groups underwent a 4-week control period (without intervention) followed by an 8-week intervention period. RESULTS: Muscle thickness and anatomical cross-sectional area increased in the electrical stimulation and combined groups. All groups presented similar improvements in torque, electrical activity and health status. CONCLUSION: Electrical stimulation alone or in combination with laser therapy generated positive effects on all evaluated parameters. Laser therapy increased health status and electrical activity, but had no effect on muscle mass.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.292
Threshold uncertainty score0.383

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations38
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Rehabilitation MedicineSame topicLaser Applications in Dentistry and MedicineFrench-language works237,207