MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2404811501 · doi:10.5603/ait.2015.0003

Cooled radiofrequency system relieves chronic knee osteoarthritis pain: the first case-series

2015· article· en· W2404811501 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Martina Bellini, Massimo Barbieri

Bibliographic record

VenueAnestezjologia, Intensywna Terapia · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLaser Applications in Dentistry and Medicine
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineWOMACOsteoarthritisVisual analogue scaleKnee painSurgeryChronic painPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Knee osteoarthritis is a frequent cause of chronic knee pain. Therapeutic solutions include intra-articular injections with short-term pain relief and surgical therapy. Radiofrequency (RF) of genicular nerves has been previously reported with varying success. Cooling tissue adjacent to the electrode (cooled RF) increases the radius of lesion. We present here the first retrospective data on pain relief and changes in function after such cooled RF denervation. METHODS: We reviewed the records of nine patients with chronic knee pain who underwent cooled RF of genicular nerves. Visual analogue scale (VAS) and Western Ontario McMaster Universities OA index (WOMAC) were analysed. RESULTS: We observed an improvement in VAS pain scores 2 ± 0.5 at one month, 2.3 ± 0.7 at three months, 2.1 ± 0.5 at six months, and 2.2 ± 0.2 at 12 months after the procedure, and WOMAC score 20 ± 2, at one month, 22 ± 0.5 at three months, 21 ± 1.7 at six months, and 20 ± 1.0 at 12 months. CONCLUSION: The majority of patients with chronic knee pain experienced a clinically relevant degree of pain relief and improved function following cooled RF of genicular nerves at one, three, six and 12 months follow-up.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations97
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnestezjologia, Intensywna TerapiaSame topicLaser Applications in Dentistry and MedicineFrench-language works237,207