MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2931269576 · doi:10.1097/md.0000000000015119

Effectiveness of extracorporeal shock wave monotherapy for avascular necrosis of femoral head

2019· article· en· W2931269576 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Huayu Tang, Yu Zhao, Yuzhi Li, Tian-shu Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone and Joint Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJiamusi University
KeywordsMedicineAvascular necrosisFemoral headSystematic reviewCochrane LibraryRandomized controlled trialMEDLINEAdverse effectMeta-analysisPhysical therapyVisual analogue scaleSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Previous clinical studies have reported that extracorporeal shock wave (EPSW) monotherapy can effectively treat avascular necrosis of femoral head (ANFH). However, no systematic review has been conducted to assess its effectiveness and safety for patients with ANFH. Therefore, this study will systematically assess the effectiveness and safety of EPSW monotherapy for patients with ANFH. METHODS: In this study, the following electronic databases will be searched from their inceptions to the present: Cochrane Library, EMBASE, PUBMED, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database. This study will include randomized controlled trials for assessing the effectiveness and safety of EPSW monotherapy for patients with ANFH. Two independent authors will perform study selection, data extraction, and methodology assessment. RevMan 5.3 software will be used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: This systematic review will provide latest summary evidence of EPSW monotherapy for patients with ANFH through assessing the outcome measurements. The primary outcome is pain intensity, which can be measured by visual analog scale or relevant measurement tools. The secondary outcomes are functional status of attacked femoral head, as assessed by Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, or other relevant scales; quality of life, as evaluated by The 36-Item Short Form Health Survey, or related instruments; and adverse events. CONCLUSION: The results of this study may provide the latest evidence for assessing the effectiveness and safety of EPSW for the treatment of ANFH. DISSEMINATION AND ETHICS: This study does not require ethical approval, because no individual data will be involved in this systematic review. The findings of this study will be published through a peer-reviewed journal. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42019124665.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.045
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.045
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.005
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicineSame topicBone and Joint DiseasesFrench-language works237,207