MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2805378017 · doi:10.1186/s12891-018-2041-7

Quadriceps combined with hip abductor strengthening versus quadriceps strengthening in treating knee osteoarthritis: a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

2018· article· en· W2805378017 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yujie Xie, Chi Zhang, Wei Jiang, Juan Huang, Lili Xu, Guoyin Pang, Haiyan Tang, Ruyan Chen, Jihua Yu, Shengmin Guo, Fangyuan Xu, Jianxiong Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Musculoskeletal Disorders · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOsteoarthritisSports medicinePhysical therapyRandomized controlled trialRheumatologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationProtocol (science)RehabilitationOrthopedic surgeryInternal medicineSurgeryAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Lower limb strengthening, especially the quadriceps training, is of much necessity for patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA). Previous studies suggest that strengthening of the hip muscles, especially the hip abductor, can potentially relieve the KOA-associated symptoms. Nevertheless, the effects of quadriceps combined with hip abductor strengthening remain unclear. Therefore, the current randomized controlled trial is designed aiming to observe whether quadriceps in combination with hip abductor strengthening can better improve the function and reduce pain in KOA patients than quadriceps training alone. METHODS: A total of 80 subjects with symptomatic KOA will be recruited from the communities and hospital outpatient, and will be randomly assigned to the experiment group (Quadriceps-plus-hip-abductor-strengthening) or the control group (Quadriceps-strengthening). Specifically, participants in the experiment group will complete 4 exercises to train the quadriceps and hip abductor twice a day for 6 weeks at home, while those in the control group will only perform 2 exercises to strengthen the quadriceps. Besides, all patients will also receive usual care management, including health education and physical agent therapy when necessary. Knee pain will be measured using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at baseline, in every week during the course of treatment, as well as 8 and 12 weeks after randomization. Furthermore, knee function will be measured using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scale, and the quality of life will be measured using the MOS Item Short-form Health Survey (SF-36). In this study, several simple tests will be applied to assess the objective function. All the assessments except for VAS will be carried out at baseline, and in the 6th, 8th and 12th weeks respectively. DISCUSSION: Our findings will provide more evidence for the effects of hip abductor strengthening on relieving pain and improving function in KOA patients. Hip abductor strengthening can be added into the muscle training program for KOA patients as a supplementary content if it is proved to be effective. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The current study has been registered with the Chinese Clinical Trials Registry (the registration number is ChiCTR-IOC-15007590 , 3rd December, 2015).

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations35
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Musculoskeletal DisordersSame topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207