Effect of Lateral Heel and Sole Wedges in Patients with Osteoarthritis of Knees
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of lateral heel and sole wedges on osteoarthritis of knees. Method: Sixty patients with knee osteoarthritis were enrolled and divided into the control (n=30) and wedge (n=30) groups. The control group received only conventional therapy for 5 weeks, while the wedge group took lateral wedges with 4 mm height in additional to the same conventional therapy. Intensity of pain and funtional activity were assessed by Western Ontario and Mac-Master Universities Osteoarthritis index (WOMAC index) and Lequesne's index. Scanogram was measured to assess femorotibial angle change. WOMAC index, Lequesne’s index and scanogram were measured before and 6 months after the therapy. Results: For the wedge group, WOMAC index and Lequesne’s index were significantly lower at the six month follow up compared to the initial indices (p＜0.05). The femorotibial angle showed no significant change in both groups. Conclusion: Lateral heel and sole wedges can be used as an effective therapeutic modality for long term management of knee osteoarthritis in combination with conventional 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 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".