The efficacy of action potential therapy, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and placebo in the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Osteoarthritis (OA) is a disease that is localized to diarthodal joints and is characterized by degeneration of hyaline cartilage, with secondary changes in the peri-articular bone and soft tissue. OA is considered to be a sequale of traumatic and age respondent degenerative changes which result in loss of cartilage and impairment of function. The purpose of this investigation is to evaluate the relative efficacy of Action Potential Therapy, Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation and placebo in the treatment of Osteoarthritis of the knee. This was a prospective, randomized clinical trial consisting of sixty patients who volunteered from the greater Durban area. The patients diagnosed as having Osteoarthritis of the knee, were randomly divided into four treatment groups. Group one and two consisted of twenty patients each and group three and four consisted often patients each, all between the age of 40 - 65 years old. Group one received Action Potential therapy (APT); group two received Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS); group three received placebo APT and group four received placebo TENS. For statistical analysis parametric and non-parametric tests were used in all hypothesis Data capturing took place for all groups at the 1st, 2nd and 4th consultations. Subjective data was collected using the Numerical Pain Rating Scale-l Ol ; McGill Pain Questionaire and Western Ontario and MacMaster Universities Index (WOMAC). Objective data was gathered using the algometer and goniometer.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 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".