Clinical observation of Diacerein and sodium hyaluronate via interarticular injection on knee osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective It is to approach observe the difference of efficacy between Diacerein and sodium hyaluronate via interarticular injection on knee osteoarthritis.Methods 120 patients with knee osteoarthritis were selected,which were divided into Diacerein group and sodium hyaluronate group randomize.The mean WOMAC Index(the western Ontario and mcmaster universities pain index) and the average severity of OA index were used to assess the clinical symptom before and after treatment in both groups.The MRI exam of knees was used in the evaluation of the function and structure changes of knees.The statistic analysis was done.Results The changes of the mean WOMAC score and mean OA severity score of the sodium hyaluronate group were markedly improved than Diacerein group after 3 and 6 months treatment(P0.01).The scores were continuity decrease between 6 and 12 months therapy in both groups,but the sodium hyaluronate group was more notable,there were statistic difference between two groups(P0.05).There were also statistic differences before and after treatment in both groups(P0.01);the abrasion of cartilage was decreased in both groups after 6 months therapy(P0.01),but there was no statistic differences between two groups(P0.05)Conclusion Both of Diacerein and sodium hyaluronate are efficiency on knee osteoarthritis via interarticular injection.The sodium hyaluronate is more improve then Diacerein in clinical symptom,while there is no difference on long term curative effect for cartilage abrasion.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".