Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To observe the clinical efficacy of bloodletting therapy in treating senile knee osteoarthritis(KOA). Methods By following the principle of a multi-center randomized controlled trial, sixty elderly KOA patients were randomized into a treatment group and a control group, 30 each. The treatment group was intervened by bloodletting therapy, and the control group was by oral administration of Diclofenac Sodium Dual Release Enteric-coated Capsules. The universally recognized Visual Analogue Scale(VAS) and Western Ontario and Mc Master Universities Index(WOMAC) of osteoarthritis were adopted for evaluation, and the efficacies and improvement of symptoms were observed. Results The total effective rate and recovery and markedly-effective rate were respectively 86.7% and 46.7% in the treatment group, versus 73.3% and 20.0% in the control group, and the differences were statistically significant(P0.05). In the treatment group, the VAS scores at the 1, 3 and 6-month follow-up were significantly different compared to that before intervention(P0.05). In the control group, the VAS scores at the 3 and 6-month follow-up were significantly different compared to that before intervention(P0.05). There were significant differences in comparing the VAS score between the two groups at the 3 and 6-month follow-up studies(P0.05). In the treatment group, the WOMAC scores(total score, pain score, stiffness score, and physical function score) at the 1, 3, and 6-month follow-up studies were significantly different from that before intervention(P0.05). In the control group, the WOMAC scores at the 3 and 6-month follow-up were significantly different compared to that before intervention(P0.05). There were significant differences in comparing the WOMAC scores between the two groups at the 3 and 6-month follow-up studies(P0.05). Conclusion Bloodletting therapy is an effective approach in treating senile KOA.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".