MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2359644876

[Knee osteoarthritis treated with moxibustion: a randomized controlled trial].

2011· article· en· W2359644876 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Xiumei Ren, Jinjin Cao, Xueyong Shen, Lizhen Wang, Ling Zhao, Fan Wu, Hai-Meng Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMoxibustionMedicineOsteoarthritisWOMACPlaceboRandomized controlled trialPhysical therapyKnee painAnesthesiaInternal medicineAcupuncture
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To observe the efficacy of moxibustion on the improvement in pain, stiffness and motor disturbance for the patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA) and evaluate the effectiveness and safety of moxibustion therapy. METHODS: Fifty-nine cases of knee OA were randomly divided into a moxibustion group (31 cases) and a placebo moxibustion group (28 cases), in which moxa cone and placebo moxa sticker were applied to Neixiyan (EX-LE 4), Dubi (ST 35) and Ashi points separately, 3 cones on each point in each treatment. The treatment was given once every two days, 3 times per week, continuously for 6 weeks. The follow-up visit was performed in 6 weeks after the end of treatment. The Western Ontario and Mcmaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and the time of 46-meter walking at the fastest speed were adopted to evaluate the recovery of joint function. UT-325 digital thermal detector was used to record the temperature change at the most apparent pain points of knee joint before and after moxibustion treatment. RESULTS: In moxibustion group, the scores in WOMAC were reduced apparently in 3 and 6 weeks treatment and during follow-up visit, separately (P < 0.05, P < 0.01, P < 0.001). In placebo moxibustion group, during follow-up visit, the score of stiffness was lower as compared with that before treatment (P < 0.05). In 6 weeks of treatment and during follow-up visit, the scores of pain, stiffness and motor disturbance in moxibustion group were reduced much more remarkably as compared with placebo moxibustion group (P < 0.01, P < 0.05). In moxibustion group, after treatment for 6 weeks,the time of 46-meter walking at the fastest speed was shorter apparently as compared with that before treatment (P < 0.01), but there was no apparent improvement after treatment in placebo moxibustion group (P > 0.05). The difference was not significant statistically in group comparison (P > 0.05). After moxibustion, the temperature at treatment point was (49.81 +/- 3.10) degrees C in moxibustion group and was (40.98 +/- 1.67) degrees C in placebo moxibustion group. The local skin temperature increased apparently as compared with that before treatment in either group (P < 0.001, P < 0.01), but the temperature increasing in moxibustion group was much more remarkable (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Moxibustion can obviously improve in the clinical symptoms for the patients with knee osteoarthritis, such as pain, stiffness and motor disturbance. It is a safe and effective therapy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.174 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations21
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→French-language works237,207→