Efficacy of corticosteroid injection for subacromial impingement syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Subacromial corticosteroid injections are frequently used for short-term pain relief in patients with subacromial impingement syndrome (SIS). However, the efficacy of corticosteroid injections is contested. The purpose of this study is to assess patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) and evaluate the duration of pain relief following a single subacromial corticosteroid injection to treat SIS. Methods: This prospective, single center cohort study enrolled 34 patients with a diagnosis of SIS. Participants received one subacromial corticosteroid injection in the affected shoulder and were evaluated at baseline, 2-week, 3- and 6-month post-injection. Results: Participants had statistically significant improvements at 3- and 6-month post injection in Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) pain, Western Ontario Rotator Cuff index (WORC), Shoulder Pain Disability Index (SPADI), and the 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36) subsections of pain, physical functioning, physical functioning role limiting, emotional role limiting and energy. Conclusions: Our study addresses some of the inconsistencies in the literature and supports the practice of administering subacromial corticosteroid injections for patients with SIS as patients demonstrated clinically significant improvements in VAS pain and other PROMs at both 3- and 6-month post-injection.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".