The Effects of Resistance Exercises and Yoga on the Life Quality and the Muscle Strength of Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systemic Review of the Previous Literatures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background & Objective: Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a common musculoskeletal disorder in elderly population leading to pain, disability, muscle weakness, and decreasing quality of life (QOL). The objective of the present study was to investigate the effects of land-based exercise therapy intervention on QOL and muscle strength in patients with knee OA in previous researches. Materials & Methods: English literature associated with the effects of land-based therapeutic exercise methods were extracted from Medline, PubMed, CINAHL, Medlib, IrMedex, Magiran, Spring link, Scopus, Cochrane, and Science Direct databases since 2000 to 2016. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, 11 articles remained to be reviewed. Results: There were 1200 patients (Mean ± Standard deviation 64.5±4.7 years of old) with knee OA in those eleven studies. Generally, two interventions were administrated for such patients including exercise therapy and Yoga. The most common treatment outcome measurements involved Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC), Short Form 36 (SF-36), and strength. Conclusion: Although it was impossible to compare the results of the eleven studies due to inconsistency in outcome measurements and their units to introduce the most effective therapeutic intervention for improvement of QOL in individuals with knee OA, the positive effect of land-based exercise therapy on signs and symptoms of such disorder was confirmed.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".