Efficacy of Tailored Exercise Therapy on Physical Functioning in Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis and Comorbidity: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy on physical functioning and safety of tailored exercise therapy in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA) and comorbidities. METHODS: ), with severity score ≥2 on the Cumulative Illness Rating Scale. The intervention group received a 20-week, individualized, comorbidity-adapted exercise program consisting of aerobic and strength training and training of daily activities. The control group received their current medical care for knee OA and were placed on a waiting list for exercise therapy. Primary outcome measures were the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, subscale physical functioning (WOMAC-pf), and the 6-minute walk test (6MWT). Measurements were performed at baseline, after 20 weeks (directly posttreatment), and at 3 months posttreatment. RESULTS: Statistically significant physical functioning differences over time were found between the intervention and control group (WOMAC: B = -7.43 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) -9.99, -4.87], P < 0.001; and 6MWT: B = 34.16 [95% CI 17.68, 50.64], P < 0.001) in favor of the intervention group. At 3 months followup, the mean improvements in the intervention group were 33% on the WOMAC scale and 15% on the 6MWT. These improvements are of clinical relevance. No serious adverse events occurred during the intervention. CONCLUSION: This is the first study showing that tailored exercise therapy is efficacious in improving physical functioning and safe in patients with knee OA and severe comorbidities.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".