MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2407854315

Is hyaluronate sodium effective in the management of knee osteoarthritis? A placebo-controlled double-blind study.

2010· article· en· W2407854315 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Evren Kul-Panza, Nadire Berker

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOsteoarthritisPlaceboWOMACVisual analogue scaleSalineSodium hyaluronateKnee painPhysical therapyHyaluronic acidAnesthesiaPhysiological salineSurgeryInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of intra-articular hyaluronic acid (HA) injection on pain and function in knee osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: Fourty-eight patients with knee OA were included in this study. The patients were randomized into two groups: one group received HA injections (average molecular weight [MW] 1.5 million Da), and the other group received placebo containing 0.9% saline. Three injections of HA or placebo were given at weeks 1, 2 and 3. The evaluation instruments were: Visual Analog Scale (VAS); Likert Scale; Lequesne 0.05), except for WOMAC pain subscore on walking at final assessment (week 14) which showed greater improvement in the HA-treated group (35.2% versus 9.1%; P=0.01). CONCLUSION: HA treatment was effective in the management of knee OA and improved knee pain and functional outcome, but there was no statistically significant difference in functional and symptom improvement with respect to saline (placebo) injection.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations26
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms→French-language works237,207→