MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2793402561 · doi:10.4103/sjsm.sjsm_53_17

Manual therapy can be a potential therapy in knee osteoarthritis

2018· article· en· W2793402561 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
MuhammadMustafa Qamar, Nimra Arshad, MuhammadJunaid Ijaz Gondal, Ayesha Basharat

Bibliographic record

VenueSaudi Journal of Sports Medicine · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBiomedical and Chemical Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOsteoarthritisMedicinePhysical therapyManual therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: Osteoarthritis (OA) is a disease of diversified etiology that causes the degeneration of the articular cartilage leading to proliferation of novel bone and reshaping of joint outline. A randomized controlled trial was conducted at the Department of Physiotherapy, Mayo Hospital, Lahore, to examine the effects of manual therapy training and neuromuscular training on knee OA.Materials and Methods: We conveniently selected a sample of 58 patients and placed into two groups. Manual therapy was applied in Group A and neuromuscular training in Group B along with conventional physiotherapy for 4 weeks.Results: The goniometry, visual analog scale, and Western Ontario and McMaster Osteoarthritis Index for knee OA were assessment tools to assess all the patients before and after 2 weeks of physical therapy intervention. Patients in Group A showed marked improvement as compared to Group B (P>0.05).Conclusion: The manual therapy group shows better results in improving pain and reducing physical disability. This study concluded that manual therapy had a more positive impact in improving pain, range of motion, and function as compared to those patients who were treated by neuromuscular training.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.298 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSaudi Journal of Sports MedicineSame topicBiomedical and Chemical ResearchFrench-language works237,207