Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To study the efficacy of the muscle energy technique on the knee osteoarthritis.Methods Thirty-seven knee osteoarthritis patients were recruited into the study and then randomly divided into the treatment group(n=18) and the control group(n=17).The control group were treated with ultrashort-wave and ultrasonic wave;while the treatment group were treated with the muscle energy technique combined the two kinds physical factors therapy.Both groups were treated for 2 sessions,20 times totally.Both groups were assessed pre and post treatment using Active Range of motion(AROM),Passive Range of motion(PROM) and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index(WOMAC).Result Both groups were found improvements in WOMAC after a 20-time treatment,the WOMAC scores of the treatment group is lower than the control group,there was difference significant between the two groups in WOMAC(P 0.05);The treatment group was found improvement in PROM after treatment while the control group was found no improvement in PROM,there was difference significant between the two groups in PROM after treatment(P 0.05).Conclusion Muscle energy technique is effective to improve the function of the knee osteoarthritis.
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 | 0.000 | 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".