Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of autologous blood injections (ABIs) against saline in patients with chronic recalcitrant patella tendinopathy (PT). DESIGN: Double-blind randomized controlled study. SETTING: Homerton Hospital Sports Medicine department. PATIENTS: Those with a diagnosis of refractory patellar tendinopathy were recruited between March 2010 and March 2012. INTERVENTIONS: Using 2 practitioners, patients were randomized to either receive ABIs or saline injections. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: All patients completed the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), a visual analog scale (VAS), and a Victoria Institute of Sport Assessment for Patella Tendinopathy scale over a 12-month period. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients completed the final review at 12 months and were included in the study. Subjects ranged in age from 22 and 61 years and were randomized to 11 in each ABI and saline groups. Autologous blood injection group had a mean duration of symptoms of 16.7 months, whereas that of the saline group was 19.2 months. The saline group mean VAS score was reduced from 7.9 to 4.5 at 1 month (P = 0.003) and 3.3 (P = 0.005) at 1 year. With ABI, the score was reduced from 7.5 to 4.5 (P = 0.005) at 1 month and 3.1 (P = 0.003) at 1 year. Victoria Institute of Sport Assessment for Patella Tendinopathy, MPQ, and VAS scores improved significantly in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that both the ABI and saline groups experienced a significant improvement in symptoms. However, when the results were compared, there was no statistical difference between the 2 groups. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This research showed that tendon fenestration is an alternative cost-effective treatment for recalcitrant PT.
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 | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.042 | 0.004 |
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".