MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2410322962 · doi:10.15305/ijrci/v4i1/189

The slow-acting, symptom modifying effects of colchicine in primary knee osteoarthritis

2016· article· en· W2410322962 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anjana Pandey, Sudhanshu Pandey, Manish Chaturvedi, Ananya Singh, Ashish Gautam, Prabhat Agarwal, Surya Kamal, Rosmy Jose

Bibliographic record

VenueInternet Journal of Rheumatology and Clinical Immunology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOsteoarthritisColchicineMedicinePrimary (astronomy)Physical medicine and rehabilitationInternal medicineAlternative medicinePathologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aim: To determine whether the therapeutic use of colchicine along with etodolac (selective cox-2 inhibitor NSAIDs) confer any beneficial effect in the treatment of osteoarthritis of knee joint. Materials and methods: Forty selected subjects were randomized to receive either 0.5 mg of colchicine twice daily or placebo for 26 weeks. Results: Visual analog scale (VAS), Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis total scale (WOMAC), and  patient global assessment and physician global assessment scores  were recorded on day 0, weeks 2, 6, 10, 14, 18, 22 and 26. Improvement rate at the end of 22 week was higher in colchicine group than placebo, as measured by VAS score (46.88 vs.51.11;P=0.033), WOMAC score (18.88 vs.24.56; P=0.019), patient global assessment score(34.69 vs. 38.33; P=0.039) and physician global assessment  score (20.00 vs. 26.39; P=0.02). Conclusion: Subjects receiving colchicine plus etodolac exhibited significantly better symptom control at the end of 22 weeks than the placebo group.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternet Journal of Rheumatology and Clinical Immunology→Same topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms→French-language works237,207→