Intervention effect of peer education to the elderly patients with knee osteoarthritis in community
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To assess the effect of peer education to the elderly patients with knee osteoarthritis(KOA) in community.Methods The cluster random sampling method was used in this survey. 100 people with clinically diagnosed KOA were recruited from the two communities in Tangshan City and randomly allocated to a control group and an intervention group, 50 cases in each group. In the intervention group, peer education program was conducted by the trained KOA patient as the group leader. The control group was only offered the KOA self-management handbooks. The primary outcomes were measured after 6 months of intervention by the Western Ontario and Mc Master Universities Osteoarthritis Index(WOMAC), the Arthritis Impact Measurement Scale 2nd version-Short Form(AIMS2-SF) and the questionnaire of the general situation which was designed by ourselves. Results From baseline to 6 months, the WOMAC total score decreased from 36.10±8.12 to 29.30±10.49, with a significant decline of 18.8% in the intervention group. The difference compared with the control group is statistically significant(F=168.321, P0.01). In the intervention group the score of AIMS2-SF improved 11.42% from 4.60 ±10.05 to 83.12 ±6.38, and two groups exhibited a significant difference(F=31.910, P0.01). Conclusion The peer education can effectively improve the function and symptoms of arthrosis and the quality of life among KOA patients. The peer education is a practicable and effective health education model for elderly patients in community.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".