The effect of daily administration of 300 mg of ovomet® for treatment of arthritis in elderly patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: To evaluate effectiveness of daily intake of 300 mg Ovomet® (egg membrane) for treatment of osteoarthritis elderly patients. Methods: This prospective study consisted of 300 mg Ovomet® intake for 50 days in 20 osteoarthritis patients previously diagnosed by medical examination. We collected demographic data, joint stiffness and function measurement (medical check-ups) and intensity of pain data (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, WOMAC questionnaire) at baseline, day 10, 20, 30, 40 and 50 of Ovomet® intake. The pain rate at beginning of the study (13.4/20) was classified as “very acute”. There is a 35% significant improvement in overall joint at the end of the study. Results: Patients were male (55%) and female (45%) with a mean age of 73.5 ± 1.35 years (mean ± standard error). The daily intake of 300 mg Ovomet® caused a gradual and statistically significant reduction in pain and stiffness intensity, and improved the functional capacity since the early days of the study. At the end of the treatment, most of the patients (70% and 95%) had an improvement in pain and functionality levels equal to or more than 20% respectively. It should be pointed out that improvement in stiffness reached almost 60% after 50 days of Ovomet® intake. Conclusion: The daily intake of 300 mg Ovomet® for osteoarthritic treatment has been effective since the beginning. Ovomet® is presented as a natural alternative for the management of pain and disability that arthrosis causes, making a huge difference in life quality of elderly people.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".