Effects of resistance training in individuals with knee osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction: Osteoarthritis (OA), the most common form of arthritis, is considered the main cause of pain and disability in the elderly. Objective: To evaluate the effect of systematic muscle strength training on functional performance and quality of life in individuals with knee OA. Methods: Subjects with knee OA (n = 27, 46 - 76 years) completed the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Medical Outcomes Short-Form 36-item Health Survey (SF-36), and visual analog scale (VAS) questionnaires, musculoskeletal assessments, and 10-repetition maximum and timed 10-meter walk tests both before and after training. The training consisted of an exercise resistance program and stretches for 12 weeks (three sessions of 80 each per week). Results: Twenty-two subjects completed the training. Reduced overall scores and WOMAC physical function indicated improved functional performance (p < 0.001) as well as increased gait speed (p < 0.001). The perception of pain decreased after training, as evidenced by the VAS, WOMAC pain domain, and SF-36 scores (p < 0.001). Quality of life improvements occurred primarily in the areas of pain, functional capacity, and SF-36 physical aspects. No change in body mass index was noted (p = 0.93). Conclusion: Our results indicate that the combination of resistance training for the quadriceps, gluteus, and abdominal muscles could be a viable alternative to improving functionality and quality of life in patients with knee OA. However, more studies are necessary to confirm our findings.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".