A preliminary case series evaluating the safety and immediate to short-term clinical benefits of joint mobilization in hemophilic arthritis of the lower limb
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Arthritis resulting from recurrent intra-articular bleeding in individuals with hemophilia can be severely debilitating due to joint pain and stiffness with subsequent loss of mobility and function. Very limited studies have investigated the potential benefits of joint mobilization for this condition. This case series is a preliminary investigation of safety, as well as immediate and short-term clinical benefits, associated with gentle knee and ankle joint mobilization in people with hemophilic arthropathy. METHODS: A single intervention of joint mobilization was applied to the affected knees and/or ankles of 16 individuals with severe or moderate hemophilia within a public hospital setting. Adverse events, as well as immediate (pain-free passive joint range, Timed Up and Go Test with maximum pain numerical rating scale) and short-term (Lower Extremity Functional Scale) effects of the intervention were evaluated with a repeated measures ANOVA. RESULTS: < 0.05) following the joint mobilization intervention. DISCUSSION: The findings of this case series suggest that gentle joint mobilization techniques may be safely considered as part of a multimodal management approach for hemophilic arthropathy.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it