Efficacy of Cabbage Leaf Wraps in the Treatment of Symptomatic Osteoarthritis of the Knee
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee is one of the most common chronic diseases among older adults. This study aimed to test the effects of cabbage leaf wraps (CLWs) in the treatment of symptomatic OA. METHODS: Patients with OA of the knee at stages II to III (Kellgren-Lawrence) were randomly assigned to 4 weeks of treatment with CLWs (daily for at least 2h), topical pain gel (TPG) (10 mg diclofenac/g, at least once daily), or usual care (UC). The primary outcome measure was pain intensity (VAS) after 4 weeks. Secondary outcomes included functional disability Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC), quality of life (SF-36), self-efficacy (Arthritis Self-Efficacy Scale-D), physical function (30 s Chair Stand Test), pressure pain sensitivity (PPT), satisfaction, and safety after 4 and 12 weeks. RESULTS: In total, 81 patients were included in this study (42 women, 65.9±10.3 y). After 4 weeks patients in the CLW group reported significantly less pain compared with those in the UC group (difference, -12.1; 95% [confidence interval] CI, -23.1, -1.0; P=0.033) but not when compared with the TPG group (difference, -8.6; 95% CI, -21.5, 4.4; P=0.190). Significant effects were also found in WOMAC, SF-36, 30-second Chair Stand Test, and PPT scores in the CLW group compared with the UC group. Compared with TPG, effects from CLW were found for WOMAC after 4 weeks and for quality of life after 12 weeks. Patients were satisfied with both active interventions, and except for 2 adverse events in both groups the applications were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: CLWs are more effective for knee OA than UC, but not compared with diclofenac gel. Therefore, they might be recommended for patients with OA of the knee. Further research is warranted.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".