Occupational Therapist–Delivered Cognitive–Behavioral Therapy for Knee Osteoarthritis: A Randomized Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of an online-assisted, occupational therapist-delivered, cognitive-behavioral therapy intervention to promote physical function in patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA). METHOD: Fifty-seven participants with KOA were randomized 2:1 to the Engage program (eight clinic-based sessions supported by online modules) or usual care. Using analysis of covariance, we estimated Engage's effect on physical function (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index's Physical Function subscale [WOMAC-PF]) at 6 mo. RESULTS: Data were analyzed on 46 completers. Engage was associated with a small effect (η² = 0.01) on the WOMAC-PF. More Engage participants than controls reported much or very much improvement (45% vs. 13%; p = .03). Satisfaction was high, and 30 of 31 participants attended six sessions or more. CONCLUSION: An online-supported cognitive-behavioral program for people with KOA delivered by occupational therapists is feasible and may contribute to improved physical function.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".